CQUniversity Unit Profile
NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing
Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing
All details in this unit profile for NURS20167 have been officially approved by CQUniversity and represent a learning partnership between the University and you (our student).
The information will not be changed unless absolutely necessary and any change will be clearly indicated by an approved correction included in the profile.
General Information

Overview

This unit will provide you with the theoretical and practical knowledge required to complete a literature review. You will identify an area of interest from your professional environment and develop a researchable literature review question that will facilitate a related quality improvement research project. Using this question, you will learn how to systematically conduct and document a review of the literature. This process will include the development of a search strategy followed by the retrieval, evaluation, cataloguing and synthesis of the selected literature.

Details

Career Level: Postgraduate
Unit Level: Level 9
Credit Points: 6
Student Contribution Band: 7
Fraction of Full-Time Student Load: 0.125

Pre-requisites or Co-requisites

There are no requisites for this unit.

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 3 - 2021

Online

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).

Class and Assessment Overview

Recommended Student Time Commitment

Each 6-credit Postgraduate 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

Bundaberg, Cairns, Emerald, Gladstone, Mackay, Rockhampton, Townsville
Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney

Assessment Overview

1. Presentation
Weighting: 25%
2. Presentation
Weighting: 25%
3. Report
Weighting: 50%

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.

Unit Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
  1. Construct a clear and focused literature review research question that allows you to explore an area of interest from your professional context
  2. Create a literature review strategy appropriate to your literature review research question
  3. Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines
  4. Critique and synthesise the literature to address the literature review research question.

NA

Alignment of Learning Outcomes, Assessment and Graduate Attributes
N/A Level
Introductory Level
Intermediate Level
Graduate Level
Professional Level
Advanced Level

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes

Assessment Tasks Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4
1 - Presentation - 25%
2 - Presentation - 25%
3 - Report - 50%

Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes

Graduate Attributes Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4
1 - Knowledge
2 - Communication
3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills
4 - Research
5 - Self-management
6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility
7 - Leadership

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes

Assessment Tasks Graduate Attributes
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 - Presentation - 25%
2 - Presentation - 25%
3 - Report - 50%
Textbooks and Resources

Textbooks

There are no required textbooks.

IT Resources

You will need access to the following IT resources:
  • CQUniversity Student Email
  • Internet
  • Unit Website (Moodle)
  • Academic Learning Centre services
  • CQUniveristy Library Resources
  • Zoom (both microphone and webcam capability)
Referencing Style

All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 7th Edition (APA 7th edition)

For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.

Teaching Contacts
Michelle Cleary Unit Coordinator
m.cleary@cqu.edu.au
Julie Shaw Unit Coordinator
j.m.shaw@cqu.edu.au
Colleen Johnston-Devin Unit Coordinator
c.johnston-devin@cqu.edu.au
Schedule
Week 1 Begin Date: 08 Nov 2021

Module/Topic

Literature Reviews: An introduction 

Chapter

Selected eReadings.  Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

ZOOM  Introductory session - see Moodle for day/time

  • Introduction
  • Moodle Site
  • Assessment
Week 2 Begin Date: 15 Nov 2021

Module/Topic

Identifying the Literature Review question.

Developing a Literature Review Plan

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 

Week 3 Begin Date: 22 Nov 2021

Module/Topic

Searching Databases

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial

Assessment 1 due: Presentation

PowerPoint presentation and 500-word submission due 5pm (AEST) Wednesday 24th November 2021 (Week 3).

Presentation: 5 - 8pm AEST Thursday 25th November 2021 OR

9 -12 noon AEST Friday 26th November 2021 OR as negotiated with the Unit Coordinator.

Week 4 Begin Date: 29 Nov 2021

Module/Topic

Data retrieval, documentation and management


Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 


Vacation Week Begin Date: 06 Dec 2021

Module/Topic

Break week

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 5 Begin Date: 13 Dec 2021

Module/Topic

Quality and critical appraisal and analysis of literature.

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 

Week 6 Begin Date: 20 Dec 2021

Module/Topic

Synthesising the literature findings


Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 

Vacation Week Begin Date: 27 Dec 2021

Module/Topic

Break week

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Week 7 Begin Date: 03 Jan 2022

Module/Topic

Reference Management Programs

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial

Week 8 Begin Date: 10 Jan 2022

Module/Topic

Structures for presenting the literature review

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial

Assessment 2 due: Presentation

PowerPoint presentation and document submission due 5 pm AEST Tuesday 11th January 5pm 2022 (Week 8).

Presentation: 5-8pm AEST Wednesday 12th January 2022 OR 9-12 noon AEST Thursday 13th January 2022 OR as negotiated with Unit Coordinator.

Week 9 Begin Date: 17 Jan 2022

Module/Topic

Writing a literature review for publication


Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial

Week 10 Begin Date: 24 Jan 2022

Module/Topic

Common problems with literature reviews.

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 

Week 11 Begin Date: 31 Jan 2022

Module/Topic

Literature review writing.

Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial 

Week 12 Begin Date: 07 Feb 2022

Module/Topic

Literature review writing.


Chapter

Selected eReadings. Please refer to Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Weekly ZOOM Tutorial

Due date: 5 pm AEST, Wednesday 9th February 2022 (Week 12)

Weighting: 50%

Length: 3000 words +/- 10% (excluding summary table and reference list)

Exam Week Begin Date: 14 Feb 2022

Module/Topic

Exam week

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

Assessment Tasks

1 Presentation

Assessment Title
Assessment 1: Presentation

Task Description

NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing

Assessment 1: Presentation

Type: Presentation

Due date: PowerPoint presentation and 500-word submission due 5pm (AEST) Wednesday 24th November 2021 (Week 3)

Presentation: 5 - 8pm AEST Thursday 25th November 2021 OR

9 -12 noon AEST Friday 26th November 2021 OR as negotiated with the Unit Coordinator.

Weighting: 25%

Length: 10-minute online presentation AND maximum of 6 slides

500 word written summary +/- 10% (excluding reference list)

(equivalent to 1000 words).

Unit Coordinator: Professor Michelle Cleary

Learning Outcome Assessed

1. Construct a clear and focused literature review search question that allows you to explore an area of interest from your professional context.

2. Create a literature review strategy appropriate to your search question.

3. Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases, and search engines.

Aim

The aim of this assessment is to construct and justify a literature review search question and approach that will guide your search of the literature on your chosen topic.

Instructions

You will give a 10-minute online presentation to your peers describing your area of interest and to justify your literature search question, approach, and search strategy. You are required to present the information for steps 3-5 below using Microsoft PowerPoint slides. Use no more than 6 slides in your presentation, including Title and Reference list slides. Please note that in-text citations and a reference list are required. You will also provide a written summary covering steps 1-6 below.

Before your presentation you will submit your Microsoft PowerPoint presentation in PDF format and additional information and documentation as required for Step 6.

Step 1 – Explore your potential quality improvement project topics for NURS20173 and NURS20174 with your workplace manager. Your final choice will inform the development of your literature search question.

Step 2 – Identify, document, and read at least 6 primary research articles on your topic which you have found from searching 2-3 databases. If you cannot identify 6 primary research articles, please contact your Unit Coordinator.

Step 3 – Present a table identifying the keywords used, databases searched, and literature retrieved for Step 2.

Step 4 – Construct and justify your literature review search question and aim from the articles found in Step 2.

Step 5 – Justify a literature review approach to apply to your research question.

Step 6 – Include in-text citations and a slide with your reference list.

Step 7 – In addition to your PowerPoint presentation you will need to provide justification for your search question, aim, literature review approach. [500 words 8-10 references]


Literature and references

In this assessment use at least 8-10 contemporary references published within the last 5 years) to support your discussion. You may also use seminal scholarly literature where relevant. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as from government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing.

Requirements

· For your presentation, use the CQUniversity Microsoft PowerPoint template available on Moodle. Keep the design simple and use dot point form and tables to present your text (the slides should provide a brief summary of concepts, not be used as a script for your presentation). Use a font size of no less than 30 point for titles, 20 point for text and 12-14 point for tables and in-text citations. Text font should be Arial or Calibri. Label figures and tables. Do not use animations or clip art. Any images used must be available for free commercial use and the source cited appropriately.

· Write in the third-person perspective, however you may use the first-person perspective for the verbal components of your presentation.

· Use formal academic language.

· Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.

Resources

· You can use unit provided materials and other credible sources (e.g. journal articles, books) to reference your argument. The quality and credibility of your sources are important.

· We recommend that you access your discipline specific Nursing Resource Guide

· For information on academic writing and referencing please go to the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources including information for students with English as a second language. There are also Oral Presentation resources.

· For information on using PowerPoint please go to the Academic Learning Centre Computing section: How to use Powerpoint.

Submission
Submission will be a two-part process:
1. Upload the PowerPoint presentation and 500-word justification onto the unit Moodle site by the submission date. The submitted and presented PowerPoint should be identical. Submit the PowerPoint in PDF format. Submit the 500-word justification as a separate file in Microsoft Word format only.
2. You will be presenting live to your lecturer and fellow students using Zoom, a video conferencing program. Your lecturer will help you with using Zoom. Your presentation may be recorded for marking purposes. If recorded, only your lecturer will have access to this video which will be stored securely.

Marking Criteria
Refer to the marking rubric for more detail on how marks will be assigned.


Assessment Due Date

PowerPoint presentation and 500-word submission due 5pm (AEST) Wednesday 24th November 2021 (Week 3). Presentation: 5 - 8pm AEST Thursday 25th November 2021 OR 9 -12 noon AEST Friday 26th November 2021 OR as negotiated with the Unit Coordinator.


Return Date to Students

Online grade and feedback via Moodle


Weighting
25%

Minimum mark or grade
49.50

Assessment Criteria

NURS20167

LITERATURE REVIEW IN HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELLBEING

ASSESSMENT 1 – Presentation

Key Criteria High Distinction 84.5 – 100% Distinction 74.50 – 84.49% Credit 64.50 – 74.49% Pass 49.50 – 64.49% Fail <49.5% Fail (content absent) 0%
PRESENTATION
Presentation (10%) The PowerPoint slide aesthetics thoroughly engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure professionally and expertly presented the required content. 5-6 slides presented. Adheres to time. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics very effectively engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure very effectively presented the required content. 5-6 slides presented. Adheres to time. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics effectively engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure effectively presented the required content. 4 slides presented. Adheres to time but a rushed presentation. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics mostly engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure satisfactorily presented. 4 slides presented. Almost adheres to time (two minutes or less over time) The PowerPoint slide aesthetics did not engage the audience. The slide presentation format and structure was unsatisfactory.
3 slides presented. Does not adhere to time (more than two minutes overtime).
PowerPoint is not presented.
Content (30%) Expert and seamless presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search summary table, Literature Review search questions and aim and review approach. Expertly constructed review search question and aim. Comprehensive substantiation and justification of search question, aim and approach. Very effective presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search summary table, Literature Review search questions and aim and review approach. Clearly constructed review search question and aim. Detailed substantiation and justification of search question, aim and approach. Effective presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search summary table, Literature Review search questions and aim and review approach. An appropriately constructed review search question and aim. Appropriate substantiation and justification of search question, aim and approach. Satisfactory presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search summary table, Literature Review search questions and aim and review approach. A mostly appropriately constructed review search question and aim. Mostly appropriate substantiation and justification of search question, aim and approach. An unsatisfactory presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search summary table, Literature Review search questions and aim and review approach. An inappropriately constructed review search question and aim. No or inappropriate substantiation and justification of search question, aim and approach. There was no content.
Professional communication (10%) The presenter professionally and comprehensively presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience expertly using a variety of communication techniques – including infrequent use of notes, plus effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter comprehensively presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience effectively using a number of known communication techniques - including effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter thoroughly presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience satisfactorily using communication techniques - including effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter satisfactorily presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience using some communication techniques – such as effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter unsuccessfully attempted to present the required content professionally and comprehensively. The presentation of the required content by the presenter is unsatisfactory. The presenter did not engage the audience. Minimal use of communication techniques. The presenter did not present.
Questions (5%) The presenter comprehensively addressed audience questions. The presenter clearly addressed audience questions. The presenter effectively addressed audience questions. The presenter mostly addressed the audience questions. The presenter did not adequately address the audience questions. The presenter did not address the audience questions.
Written Justification - 500-word submission
Written Justification (25%) Excellent justification of the search question, aim and literature review approach. The discussion of the supporting literature cogently and comprehensively justifies the question, aim and approach. Proficient justification of the search question, aim and literature review approach. The discussion of the supporting literature cogently justifies the question, aim and approach. Effective justification of the search question, aim and literature review approach. The discussion of the supporting literature appropriately justifies the question, aim and approach. Satisfactory justification of the search question, aim and literature review approach. The discussion of the supporting literature somewhat justifies the question, aim and approach. Unsatisfactory justification of the search question, aim and literature review approach. The discussion of the supporting literature does not justify the question, aim and approach. No written justification present.
Academic Writing Skills (15%) Exemplary writing standard. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Organisation and structure exceptionally clear and easy to follow. Quality of writing is of a high standard with only very minor grammar, spelling, punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure very clear and easy to follow. Quality of writing is above standard with a few grammar, spelling, punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure appropriate and reasonable to follow. Quality of writing of a satisfactory standard with quite a few grammar, spelling, and punctuation mistakes evident.  Organisation and structure apparent although not easy to follow. Quality of writing is of poor standard with numerous grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure lacks clarity and is difficult to follow. Little to no meaningful writing.
Substantiation and Referencing (5%) The information in the PowerPoint and written justification was expertly substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 10 contemporary* references. References were correctly cited using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint and written justification was very effectively substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 10 contemporary* references. References were correctly cited using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint and written justification was effectively substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 9 contemporary* references. References were mostly correctly cited, with 1-2 consistent errors, using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint and written justification was satisfactorily substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 8 contemporary* references. References were mostly correctly cited, with 3-4 consistent errors, using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint and written justification is unsatisfactorily substantiated. 7 contemporary* references. APA referencing not used, or ≥ 5 consistent in-text or reference list errors. The information in the PowerPoint and written justification was not substantiated.

Note: *Contemporary literature – published within the last 5 years.


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submission will be a two-part process:  Upload the PowerPoint presentation and 500-word justification onto the unit Moodle site by the submission date. The submitted and presented PowerPoint should be identical. Submit the PowerPoint in PDF format. Submit the 500-word justification as a separate file in Microsoft Word format only. You will be presenting live to your lecturer and fellow students using Zoom, a video conferencing program. Your lecturer will help you with using Zoom. Your presentation will be recorded for marking purposes. Only your lecturer will have access to this video which will be stored securely.

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Construct a clear and focused literature review research question that allows you to explore an area of interest from your professional context
  • Create a literature review strategy appropriate to your literature review research question
  • Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines


Graduate Attributes
  • Knowledge
  • Communication
  • Cognitive, technical and creative skills
  • Research
  • Ethical and Professional Responsibility

2 Presentation

Assessment Title
Assessment 2: Presentation

Task Description

NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing

Assessment 2: Presentation

Type: Presentation

Due date: PowerPoint presentation and document submission due 5 pm AEST Tuesday 11th January 5pm 2022 (Week 8).

Presentation: 5-8pm AEST Wednesday 12th January 2022 OR 9-12 noon AEST Thursday 13th January 2022 OR as negotiated with Unit Coordinator.

Weighting: 25%

Length: 10-minute presentation AND 500-word summary table +/- 10%

(equivalent to 1000 words).

Unit Coordinator: Professor Michelle Cleary

Learning Outcome Assessed

3. Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines.

4. Critique and synthesise the literature to address the research question.


Aim

This assessment builds on Assessment 1. The aim of this assessment is to demonstrate your ability to formulate, document and present a comprehensive search strategy, results and initial critique and synthesis of the retrieved literature.

Instructions

You will give a 10-minute online presentation to your peers describing your literature search plan, results, emerging themes and gaps in the literature.

You are required to present this information using Microsoft PowerPoint slides.

Use no more than eight slides as outlined below. Please note that in-text citations and a reference list are required.

Before your presentation you will submit your Microsoft PowerPoint presentation in PDF format and additional information and documentation as required for Step 2.

Step 1: You will need to present a minimum of six slides with the following information.

Slide 1: Title slide which includes your literature review search question.

Slide 2: An outline of your search strategy (can be two slides)

Slide 3: Your summary table– significant points only as below in Step 2 (can be two slides)

Slide 4: Your emerging themes

Slide 5: Any identified gaps in the literature

Slide 6: Reference List

Step 2. Submit full summary table of significant points of relevant retrieved articles using the suggested framework below.

Author/s, year and country Aim Design Sample and population Method Analysis Findings

Literature and references

In this assessment use at least 8-10 contemporary references (5 years or less) to support your search strategy and analysis and cite the retrieved literature. You may also use seminal scholarly literature where relevant. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as from government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing.

Requirements

· For your presentation, use the CQUniversity Microsoft PowerPoint template available on Moodle. Keep the design simple and use dot point form and tables to present your text (the slides should provide a brief summary of concepts, not be used as a script for your presentation). Use a font size of no less than 30 point for titles, 20 point for text and 12 point for tables and in-text citations. Text font should be Arial or Calibri. Label figures and tables. Do not use animations or clip art. Any images used must be available for free commercial use and the source cited appropriately.

· Write in the third-person perspective, however you may use the first-person perspective for the verbal components of your presentation.

· Use formal academic language.

· Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.

Resources

· You can use unit provided materials and other credible sources (e.g. journal articles, books) to reference your argument. The quality and credibility of your sources are important.

· We recommend that you access your discipline specific Nursing Resource Guide

· You may like to manage your citations and reference list. Information on how to use academic referencing software (EndNote) is available at the CQUniversity Library website should you wish to learn how to use it.

· For information on academic writing and referencing please go to the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources including information for students with English as a second language. There are also Oral Presentation resources.

· For information on using PowerPoint please go to the Academic Learning Centre Computing section: How to use PowerPoint.

Submission

Submission will be a two-part process:

1. Upload the PowerPoint presentation, and summary table onto the unit Moodle site by the submission date. The submitted and presented PowerPoint should be identical. Submit one PDF document which combines the PowerPoint presentation, summary table (2) and retrieved articles. Instructions on how to convert and combine files into a PDF document is available on Moodle.
2. You will be presenting live to your lecturer and fellow students using Zoom, a video conferencing program. Your lecturer will help you with using Zoom. Your presentation will be recorded for marking purposes. If recorded, only your lecturer will have access to this video which will be stored securely.

Marking Criteria

Refer to the marking rubric for more detail on how marks will be assigned.


Assessment Due Date

PowerPoint presentation and document submission due 5 pm AEST Tuesday 11th January 5pm 2022 (Week 8). Presentation: 5-8pm AEST Wednesday 12th January 2022 OR 9-12 noon AEST Thursday 13th January 2022 OR as negotiated with Unit Coordinator.


Return Date to Students

Online grade and feedback via Moodle


Weighting
25%

Minimum mark or grade
49.50

Assessment Criteria

NURS20167

LITERATURE REVIEW IN HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELLBEING

ASSESSMENT 2 – Presentation

Key Criteria High Distinction 84.5 – 100% Distinction 74.50 – 84.49% Credit 64.50 – 74.49% Pass 49.50 – 64.49% Fail <49.5% Fail (content absent) 0%
PRESENTATION
PowerPoint Presentation- (10%) The PowerPoint slide aesthetics thoroughly engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure professionally and expertly presented the required content. 6-8 slides presented. Adheres to time. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics very effectively engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure very effectively presented the required content. 6-8 slides presented. Adheres to time. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics effectively engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure effectively presented the required content. 6-8 slides presented. Adheres to time but a rushed presentation. The PowerPoint slide aesthetics mostly engaged the audience. The slide presentation format and structure satisfactorily presented. 6-8 slides presented. Almost adheres to time (two minutes or less over time). The PowerPoint slide aesthetics did not engage the audience. The slide presentation format and structure were unsatisfactory.
Less than 6 slides presented. Does not adhere to time (more than two minutes overtime).
PowerPoint is not presented.
Content (30%) Expert and seamless presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search strategy outline, Summary Table (1), Emerging Themes, and Gaps in the literature. A comprehensive overview of the search, retrieval, critique and synthesise processes undertaken. Very effective presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search strategy outline, Summary Table (1), Emerging Themes, and Gaps in the literature. A very effective overview of the processes used to identify, retrieve, critique and synthesise research literature. Effective presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search strategy outline, Summary Table (1), Emerging Themes, and Gaps in the literature. An effective overview of the processes used to identify, retrieve, critique and synthesise research literature. Satisfactory presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search strategy outline, Summary Table (1), Emerging Themes, and Gaps in the literature. A satisfactory overview of the processes used to identify, retrieve, critique and synthesise research literature. An unsatisfactory presentation of the assessment steps: Title and Author, Search strategy outline, Summary Table (1), Emerging Themes, and Gaps in the literature. The overview of the processes used to identify, retrieve, critique and synthesise research literature project is poorly explained. There was no content.
Professional communication (15%) The presenter professionally and comprehensively presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience expertly using a variety of communication techniques – including infrequent use of notes, plus effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter comprehensively presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience effectively using a number of known communication techniques - including effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter thoroughly presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience satisfactorily using communication techniques - including effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter satisfactorily presented the required content. The presenter engaged the audience using some communication techniques – such effective use of voice and body language to maintain audience engagement. The presenter attempts unsuccessfully to present the required content professionally and comprehensively. The presentation of the required content by the presenter is unsatisfactory. The presenter did not engage the audience. Minimal use of communication techniques. The presenter did not present.
Questions (5%) The presenter comprehensively addressed audience questions. The presenter clearly addressed audience questions. The presenter effectively addressed audience questions. The presenter mostly addressed the audience questions. The presenter did not adequately address the audience questions. The presenter did not address the audience questions.
Summary Table (Step 2)
Summary Table (30%) Summary table provides an expertly presented and comprehensive overview and analysis of the review papers. Excellent highlighting of article content relevant to the review. Summary table provides a very well presented, very clear detailed overview and analysis of the review papers. Very good highlighting of article content relevant to the review. Summary table provides a well presented, clear and reasonably detailed overview and analysis of the review papers. Appropriate highlighting of article content relevant to the review. Summary tableprovides a mostly well presented, and acceptable overview and analysis of the review papers. Mostly appropriate highlighting of article content relevant to the review. Summary table is poorly presented, and unsatisfactory overview and analysis of the review papers. Highlighting of article content relevant to the review is incomplete or inaccurate. No summary table present.
Academic Writing and Referencing
Academic writing (5%) Exemplary writing standard. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. Organisation and structure exceptionally clear and easy to follow. Quality of writing is of a high standard with only very minor grammar, spelling, punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure very clear and easy to follow. Quality of writing is above standard with a few grammar, spelling, punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure clear appropriate and can be followed. Quality of writing of a satisfactory standard with quite a few grammar, spelling, and punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure apparent although not easy to follow. Quality of writing is of poor standard with numerous grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes evident. Organisation and structure lacks clarity and is difficult to follow. Little to no meaningful writing.
Substantiation and Referencing (5%) The information in the PowerPoint/summary table is expertly substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 10 contemporary* references. References were correctly cited using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint /summary table is effectively substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 10 contemporary* references. References were correctly cited using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint /summary table is appropriately substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 8 contemporary* references. References were mostly correctly cited, with 1 consistent error, using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint /summary table is mostly substantiated using logic and evidence with a minimum of 8 contemporary* references. References were mostly correctly cited, with 2 consistent errors, using APA 7 edition style. The information in the PowerPoint /summary table is inaccurately or not substantiated using logic and evidence with less than 8 contemporary* references. APA referencing not used, or more than 5 consistent in-text or reference list errors. The information in the PowerPoint /summary table is not substantiated.

Notes: *Contemporary literature – published within the last 5 years.


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submission will be a two-part process: Upload the PowerPoint presentation, summary table and articles onto the unit Moodle site by the submission date. The submitted and presented PowerPoint should be identical. Submit one PDF document which combines the PowerPoint presentation, summary table (2) and retrieved articles. Instructions on how to convert and combine files into a PDF document is available on Moodle. You will be presenting live to your lecturer and fellow students using Zoom, a video conferencing program. Your lecturer will help you with using Zoom. Your presentation will be recorded for marking purposes. Only your lecturer will have access to this video which will be stored securely.  

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines
  • Critique and synthesise the literature to address the literature review research question.


Graduate Attributes
  • Knowledge
  • Communication
  • Cognitive, technical and creative skills
  • Research
  • Ethical and Professional Responsibility

3 Report

Assessment Title
Assessment 3: Report

Task Description

NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing

Assessment 3: Report

Type: Written Assessment

Due date: 5 pm AEST, Wednesday 9th February 2022 (Week 12)

Weighting: 50%

Length: 3000 words +/- 10% (excluding summary table and reference list)

Unit Coordinator: Professor Michelle Cleary

Learning Outcome Assessed

1. Construct a clear and focused literature review research question that allows you to explore an area of interest from your professional context.

2. Create a literature review strategy appropriate to your research question.

3. Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines.

4. Critique and synthesise the literature to address the research question.

Aim

The aim of this assessment is to write a publishable literature review report which identifies a general review topic, describes the search strategies you employed to identify literature based on your topic and critically analyses and synthesises the selected literature.

Instructions

Please follow the steps below to complete your assessment task:

1. Choose an industry, peer reviewed journal to target your literature review towards and access the author guidelines (for example, Nursing and Health Sciences, Nurse Education in Practice).

2. Check to see if your topic is relevant to the journal selected and the journal publishes literature reviews.

3. Check the quality of the journal.

4. Select three recent literature review articles from the selected journal to guide your writing in the journal style.

5. Write your literature review as per the author guidelines for your chosen journal, ensuring it broadly includes:

    a. Abstract with keywords including MeSH terms

    b. Introduction with background/context

    c. Method

    d. Findings – PRISMA flow diagram, summary table with data extraction, key findings

    e. Discussion including limitations

    f. Conclusion

6. Referencing, irrespective of the author guidelines MUST be APA 7 style.

Literature and references

In this assessment use 8-10 contemporary references (5 years or less) to support your discussion. You may also use seminal scholarly literature where relevant. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing.

Requirements

Follow the author guidelines for your chosen journal, except for the referencing. Where specific instructions are not provided, please use the following:

· Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman or Arial, with 1.5 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).

· Include page numbers on each page in a footer

· Write in the third-person perspective.

· Use formal academic language.

· Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.

· The word count is considered from the first word of the introduction to the last word of the conclusion. The word count excludes the reference list but includes in-text references and direct quotations.

Resources

· You can use unit provided materials and other credible sources (e.g. journal articles, books) to reference your argument. The quality and credibility of your sources are important.

· We recommend that you access your discipline-specific Nursing Resource Guide.

· You may like to manage your citations and reference list. Information on how to use academic referencing software (EndNote) is available at the CQUniversity Library website should you wish to learn how to use it.

· For information on academic writing and referencing please go to the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources, including information for students with English as a second language.

· Submit a draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here.

Submission

Submit your assessment via the unit Moodle site in Microsoft Word format only. Once marked, you may like to submit your manuscript to the journal after reviewing your feedback and making appropriate amendments.

Marking Criteria

Refer to the marking rubric for more detail on how marks will be assigned.


Assessment Due Date

5 pm AEST, Wednesday 9th February 2022 (Week 12)


Return Date to Students

Online grade and feedback via Moodle


Weighting
50%

Minimum mark or grade
49.50

Assessment Criteria

NURS20167

LITERATURE REVIEW IN HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELLBEING

ASSESSMENT 3 – Report

Key Criteria High Distinction 84.5 – 100% Distinction 74.50 – 84.49% Credit 64.50 – 74.49% Pass 49.50 – 64.49% Fail <49.5% Fail (content absent) 0%
Abstract (10%) Concise and comprehensive summary of literature review for publication which is exceptionally structured and written. 5 key words are included using MeSH terms. Concise and comprehensive summary of literature review for publication which is very well structured and written. 4 key words are included using MeSH terms. Largely concise and comprehensive summary of literature review for publication which is well structured and written. 4 key words are included. Satisfactory summary of literature review for publication, however, is not concise and/or not comprehensive. The structure and writing are satisfactory but somewhat confusing. 3 key words are included. The abstract does not satisfactorily summarise the literature review for publication. The content is verbose and/or difficult to comprehend. The structure and writing are unsatisfactory. Key words inappropriate or not included. No abstract present.
Introduction (10%) Succinct and clear outline of the background and components of the literature review. Succinct and informative discussion of the importance and potential benefits of the exploring the issue. The search question and aim of the review is expertly defined using PICO/T or equivalent. Clear outline of the background and components of the literature review. Detailed discussion of the importance and potential benefits of the exploring the issue. The search question and aim of the review is clearly defined using PICO/T or equivalent. Mostly clear outline of the background and components of the literature review. Appropriate discussion of the importance and potential benefits of exploring the issue. The search question and aim of the literature review is appropriately defined, using PICO/T or equivalent. Satisfactory outline of the background and components of the literature review. Satisfactory discussion of the importance and potential benefits of exploring the issue. Further clarity required. The search question and aim of the literature review is defined. PICO/T or equivalent not used. Inadequate outline of the background and components of the literature review. Little or no discussion of the importance and potential benefits of exploring the issue. The search question and aim of the literature review is not clearly defined. PICO/T or equivalent not used. Introduction not present.
Search Strategy (20%) Evidence of an advanced ability to design and follow a structured approach to retrieving quality research literature to answer the search question. The retrieval process is expertly and accurately documented and discussed logically. The Summary Table and Prisma Flow Diagram are expertly presented and appear accurate. Evidence of a proficient ability to design and follow a structured approach to retrieving quality research literature. The retrieval process is accurately documented and discussed logically. The Summary Table and Prisma Flow Diagram are very well presented and appear accurate with minimal, minor errors. Evidence of a good ability to design and follow a structured approach to retrieving quality research literature. The retrieval process is mostly accurately documented and discussed appropriately. The Summary Table and Prisma Flow Diagram are well presented and appear accurate with minimal errors. The assessment lacks some content and cohesiveness in demonstrating an ability to design and follow a structured approach to retrieving quality research literature. The retrieval process documentation contains a number of errors, and the presented information is at times repetitive or lacks cohesion. The Summary Table and Prisma Flow Diagram are presented with a number of errors. The assessment does not demonstrate an ability to design and follow a structured approach to retrieving quality research literature. The retrieval process is poorly and inappropriately documented and contains significant and careless errors. The assessment lacks clarity and cohesion. The Summary Table and Prisma Flow Diagram are not included or contain significant and careless errors. No search strategy present.
Analysis and Synthesis (30%) Evidence of an advanced ability to analyse and synthesise the research evidence. Themes are expertly presented, with a comprehensive and critical discussion that demonstrates an extensive understanding of the issue. Limitations of the review are expertly identified and discussed. Evidence of a proficient ability to analyse and synthesise the research evidence. Themes are very well presented, with a detailed and critical discussion that demonstrates a very good understanding of the issue. Limitations of the review are very well identified and discussed. Evidence of a good ability to analyse and synthesise the research evidence. Themes are well presented, with a somewhat detailed and critical discussion that demonstrates a good understanding of the issue. Limitations of the review are well identified and discussed. Evidence of a satisfactory ability to analyse and synthesise the research evidence. Themes are reasonably presented, with a discussion that demonstrates a reasonable understanding of the issue. Limitations of the review are identified and discussed. Further critique and clarity required. Little or no evidence of an ability to analyse and synthesise the research evidence. Themes are incomplete or inappropriate. reasonably presented, with little or no evidence of an understanding of the issue. Limitations of the review incomplete or not to discussed to a satisfactory level. No evidence of analysis or synthesis.
Conclusion (5%) Conclusions are insightful, very well supported and flow logically from work presented. Conclusions are sound, well supported and flow logically from work presented. Conclusions are logical, mostly supported, and linked to the work presented. Conclusions are satisfactory. They are somewhat supported with limited links to the work presented. Conclusions are unsatisfactory. They are not supported or have weak links to the work presented. No conclusion present.
Efficiency & Organisation (5%) An articulate literature review. There is a succinct and compelling introduction which introduces your paper and outlines its direction. The review is cogent and is brought to a compelling conclusion. A well written report. There is a clear and appropriate introduction which introduces the paper and outlines its direction very well. The report proceeds logically and is brought to a sensible conclusion. Appropriately written report. There is an appropriate introduction which mostly introduces the paper and its direction well. The report mostly proceeds logically and is brought to an appropriate conclusion. Adequately articulated report. An introduction is apparent, and the papers has been somewhat introduced. There is an attempt made to outline the direction of the paper. The report is at times repetitive or lacks cohesion. An adequate conclusion is evident. The introduction is not apparent or does not attempt to introduce your paper or outline the direction of the paper. The report does not flow logically, is poorly written and is not brought to an adequate close. An inarticulate report. Missing an introduction and a conclusion.
Ability to write and present effectively (10%) Exemplary writing standard and style. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation and paragraph structure. The literature review is exceptionally well-presented and is free from errors. Quality of writing is of a high standard with only very minor grammar, spelling, punctuation and paragraph structure mistakes evident. The literature review is very well presented. Quality of writing is of a good standard with a few grammatical, spelling, and paragraph structure mistakes evident. The literature review is well presented. Quality of writing and presentation is of a satisfactory standard with quite a few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes evident. The literature review is satisfactorily presented. Quality of writing and presentation is at a poor standard with many inaccuracies in grammar, spelling and punctuation evident. The literature review is poorly presented. Little to no meaningful writing. Quality of the writing, presentation of the report and/or formatting results in a literature review which is almost unreadable.
Substantiation of discussion (5%) Discussion is substantiated consistently with logic, examples, and with reference to the current literature. A minimum of 10 contemporary* references have been cited. Discussion is generally substantiated with logic, examples, and with reference to the current peer reviewed literature, with 1 or 2 exceptions. A minimum of 10 contemporary* references have been cited. Discussion is partly substantiated with logic, examples, and with reference to the current peer reviewed literature, with 3 or 4 exceptions. A minimum of 8 contemporary* references have been cited. Discussion is occasionally substantiated with logic, examples, and with reference to the current peer reviewed literature, with 5 or 6 exceptions. A minimum of 8 contemporary* references have been cited. Discussion does not or infrequently attempts to (>7 errors) to substantiate discussion with logic, examples, and with reference to the current peer reviewed literature. Less than 5 contemporary* references have been cited. No substantiation of discussion. No contemporary* references have been cited.
Referencing 5% Accurate APA referencing. No in-text referencing or reference list errors. Mostly accurate APA referencing. 1-2 consistent in-text or reference list errors (may be made multiple times). Somewhat accurate APA referencing. 3 consistent in-text or reference list errors (may be made multiple times). Occasionally accurate APA referencing. 4 consistent in-text or reference list errors (made multiple times). APA referencing not used, or more than 5 consistent in-text or reference list errors. No references included.

Notes: *Contemporary literature – published within the last 5 years.


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Submission Instructions
Submit your assessment via the unit Moodle site in Microsoft Word format only. 

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Construct a clear and focused literature review research question that allows you to explore an area of interest from your professional context
  • Create a literature review strategy appropriate to your literature review research question
  • Undertake a literature search using appropriate methods, databases and search engines
  • Critique and synthesise the literature to address the literature review research question.


Graduate Attributes
  • Knowledge
  • Communication
  • Cognitive, technical and creative skills
  • Research
  • Ethical and Professional Responsibility

Academic Integrity Statement

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?