Overview
This unit introduces you to the construction of empirical knowledge in nursing, midwifery and social sciences. You will examine research paradigms and methodologies related to quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research. From these foundations, you will develop the skills and knowledge required to produce a research proposal, including ethical considerations, methods, data collection, and data analysis.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Co-requisite of NURS20173 - Nursing, Midwifery and Social Sciences Project 1
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 1 - 2023
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 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
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 SUTE
The unit worked very well with NURS20167 and NURS20173 to help add to and consolidate information across all units.
Continue to develop the units together to ensure scaffolding of learning.
Feedback from SUTE
NURS10167 and NURS20168 both had very large heavily weighted assignments due very close together, not sure if it's possible but spacing one or the other out would be helpful for students undertaking these two units at the same time.
The timing of the assessment has been changed to avoid student overload.
- Reflect on different research paradigms and their relevance to personal worldviews and professional context
- Construct and justify research question/s and their alignment with qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research design/s
- Propose and justify the research methods for data collection and analysis to answer your research question/s
- Discuss ethical considerations relevant to your research proposal.
NA
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Essay - 20% | ||||
| 2 - Presentation - 30% | ||||
| 3 - Research Proposal - 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 | ||||
| 8 - 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 | |
| 1 - Essay - 20% | ||||||||
| 2 - Presentation - 30% | ||||||||
| 3 - Research Proposal - 50% | ||||||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
- Microsoft Word
- Zoom
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.
c.johnston-devin@cqu.edu.au
l.jack@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction to the unit
Introduction to designing research
Research proposals
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Module/Topic
The nature of knowledge
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Research paradigms
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
A reflection on research paradigms Due: Week 3 Friday (24 Mar 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Constructing a research question
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Module/Topic
Research design
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Vacation week
Chapter
Vacation week
Events and Submissions/Topic
No Zoom drop-in session in vacation week.
Module/Topic
Research design continued
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom drop-in session. See Moodle for details
A presentation on research questions and design Due: Week 6 Wednesday (19 Apr 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Research proposals – An overview and the front sections
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Research proposals continued – Methodology and Methods
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom drop-in session. See Moodle for details
Module/Topic
Research proposals continued – Research ethics
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Research proposals continued– Ethics section and conclusion
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Module/Topic
The use of arguments and reasoning in research
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Module/Topic
Finalising your research proposal
Chapter
See eReading list for recommended readings.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Unit Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Research proposal Due: Week 12 Friday (2 June 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Essay
Length: 850 words plus or minus 10% (excluding reference list)
Aim
The aim of this assessment is to allow you to explore and examine your personal worldview in relation to four main research paradigms (Positivism, Interpretivism, Critical Inquiry and Pragmatism).
To successfully undertake this essay, you will need to engage with the unit material on the NURS20168 Moodle site (Weeks 1 – 3). The resources offered during these weeks will support you to complete this assessment task.
Instructions
You are writing a reflective essay. Positivism, Interpretivism, Critical Inquiry and Pragmatism are major research paradigms and have their own underlying ontological and epistemological assumptions (Crotty, 1998; Jacobsen, 2020). Your reflection should first demonstrate your understanding of the major research paradigms. Then discuss how your personal worldview connects with one of them. Your explanation should include how your personal assumptions, understandings and concepts of the world relate to Positivism, Interpretivism, Critical Inquiry, or Pragmatism. You can relate your response to your specialty area of practice within nursing.
Please follow the steps below to complete your assessment task:
1. Write an introductory paragraph that provides an outline of your essay. Begin with a general statement to introduce the topic and purpose of the essay, followed by an outline of the main arguments. This is done to orient your reader about the content in your essay.
2. In the first section of the body of the essay, begin by providing a brief overview of the research paradigms.
3. In the second section of the body of the essay, reflect on and discuss how your personal worldview connects with one of these research paradigms. The discussion needs to explain how your personal assumptions, understandings and concepts of the world relates to Positivism, Interpretivism, Critical Inquiry, or Pragmatism.
4. Write a concluding paragraph that summarises your key arguments and draws your essay together to a logical close.
Literature and references
In this assessment use at least 5 appropriate references ( 5 years and under) to support your discussion. 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. Note, websites such as Stat Pearls, Life in the Fast Lane and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task.
Requirements
· Include a title page which includes your name, student name and number, and in-text word count.
· Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman or Arial, with 2.0 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).
· Include page numbers on the top right side of each page in a header.
· Write in the first-person perspective (I, my).
· Use formal academic language.
· Start your reference list on a separate page to the body of your assessment.
· 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
· An exemplar has been provided on the Moodle site in the Assessment 1 portal. This exemplar is an extract from a comparable assessment that discusses a similar topic to give you an idea of what is required. Take note of the language that has been used, which is academic, but not overly complicated. The referencing is also comprehensive.
· 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 library guide: the Nursing and Midwifery Guide.
· We recommend you use EndNote to manage your citations and reference list. More information on how to use EndNote is available at the CQUniversity Library website.
· For information on academic communication 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.
· You may wish to submit a draft to Studiosity.
· Submit a draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
1. Reflect on different research paradigms and their relevance to personal worldviews and professional context.
Submission
Submit your saved assessment in Microsoft Word format only and via the Assessment One submission portal in the unit Moodle site.
Marking Criteria
Refer to the marking rubric on the Moodle site for more detail on how marks will be assigned.
If you do not receive a passing grade, you may be eligible for a re-attempt. A re-attempt is where you are given a second opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of one or more of the unit’s learning outcomes before you can progress to new learning or participate in subsequent learning activities. You may be given the opportunity to re-attempt an assessment but will only achieve a mark no greater than the minimum for a pass standard for the assessment. You must:
· have shown a reasonable attempt to complete the initial assessment task
· be granted a re-attempt by your Unit Lead/Coordinator
· make changes to the nominated assessment task which you have failed and resubmit the revised work for marking within seven consecutive days, no assessment extensions will be approved.
Please note: Only one opportunity for a re-attempt is allowed.
References
Crotty, M. (1998). Introduction: The research process. In M. Crotty (Ed.), The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process (pp. 1-17). Allen & Unwin.
*Note: This is an example of a seminal resource.
Jacobsen, K. H. (2021). Introduction to health research methods: a practical guide (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
**Note: This is a recent, current resource.
Week 3 Friday (24 Mar 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Week 5 Friday (7 Apr 2023)
| Key Criteria | High Distinction 100 - 85% | Distinction 84.9 - 75% | Credit 74.9 - 65% | Pass 64.9 - 50% | Fail <49.9% | |
| Presentation Structure and Design (10%) | (10-8.5) Excellent presentation of assessment according to requirements. Adheres to prescribed word count. Consistently accurate with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. Organisation and structure clear and easy to follow. Written in first person language. | (8.4-7.5) Well-presented assessment with 1 formatting error. Adheres to prescribed word count. Minimal (1-2) critical errors in spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure clear and relatively easy to follow. Written in first person language. | (7.4-6.5) Good presentation of assessment with 2 formatting errors. Adheres to prescribed word count. Few (3-4) critical errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure appropriate and can be followed. Written in first person language. | (6.4-5) An adequately presented assessment with more than 3 formatting errors. Adheres to prescribed word count. Several (5-6) critical errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure apparent although not easy to follow. Written in first person language. | (4.9-0) Poorly presented assessment that inconsistently or does not follow requirements. Deviates significantly from prescribed word count. Many (>6) errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure; organisation and structure lacks clarity and is difficult to follow. Inconsistently or is not written in first person language. | |
| Introduction and Conclusion (10%) | (10-8.5) The essay has a clear and succinct introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides excellent background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion succinctly summarises the key points. | (8.4-7.5) The essay has a clear introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides good background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion summarises most key points. | (7.4-6.5) The essay has an adequate introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides some background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion summarises some key points. | (6.4-5) An introduction and conclusion have been attempted. The introduction provides limited background information and outline of the essay’s direction, and the conclusion has a few key points. | (4.9-0) The essay does not have a clear and succinct introduction and conclusion. The introduction does not outline the direction of the essay, or it lacks background information. The conclusion does not bring the essay to a logical close. | |
| Knowledge of paradigms (15%) | (15 – 12.75) Comprehensive discussion that demonstrates an excellent understanding of the research paradigms. | (11.25 – 12.74) Strong discussion that demonstrates a very good understanding of the research paradigms. | (9.75 – 11.24) Relevant discussion that demonstrates a solid understanding of the research paradigms. | (7.5 – 9.74) Some relevant discussion that demonstrates a fair understanding of the research paradigms. | (7.4 – 0) Inadequate or inappropriate discussion that demonstrates limited understanding of the research paradigms. | |
| Knowledge of chosen paradigm (25%) | (25 – 21.25) Content provides comprehensive and critical discussion that demonstrates an excellent understanding of the chosen research paradigm. | (21.24 – 18.75)Content provides strong and relevant discussion that demonstrates a very good understanding of the chosen research paradigm. | (18.74 – 16.25)Content provides adequate and relevant discussion that demonstrates a solid understanding of the chosen research paradigm. | (16.24 – 12.5)Content provides some relevant discussion that demonstrates a fair understanding of the chosen research paradigm. | (12.4 – 0)Content provides inadequate or inappropriate discussion that demonstrates limited understanding of the chosen research paradigm. | |
| Reflection (30%) | (30-25.5) There is clear and strong reflection in relation to the student’s personal worldview. This is consistent throughout the essay. | (25.4-22.4) There is very good reflection in relation to the student’s personal worldview. This is generally consistent throughout the essay. | (22.3-19.4) There is evidence of reflection in relation to the student’s personal worldview. This is often consistent throughout the essay. | (19.3-15) There is some reflection in relation to the student’s personal worldview. There are many inconsistencies in the discussion are apparent. | (14.9-0) There is little or no evidence of reflection in relation to the student’s personal worldview in the essay. | |
| Use of evidence (5%) | (5-4.25) Expertly integrates quality references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations with no exceptions. | (4.2-3.8) Consistently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations with 1 or 2 exceptions. | (3.75 – 3.55) Frequently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions. | (3.50 – 2.5) Occasionally integrates references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions. | (2.45 – 0) Infrequent or fails to attempt (>6 errors) to integrate references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. | |
| Referencing (5%) | (5-4.25) Referencing fully adheres to APA 7th style guidelines. | (4.2-3.8) Referencing generally adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 1-2 consistent errors. | (3.75 – 3.55) Referencing mostly adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 3-4 consistent errors. | (3.50 – 2.5) Referencing occasionally adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 5-6 consistent errors. | (2.45 – 0) Referencing does not adhere to APA 7th style guidelines with more than 6 consistent errors. | |
- Reflect on different research paradigms and their relevance to personal worldviews and professional context
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Research
- Self-management
2 Presentation
Type: Presentation
Length: 10 minutes plus or minus 10% (six PowerPoint slides)
Aim
The aim of this assessment is for you to construct and justify research questions and explore how they align with different research designs using unit material to undertake real-life research. To meet this aim, please engage with the weekly unit material from Weeks 1-6 where resources are provided that will support you to complete this assessment task.
Instructions
You are preparing an oral presentation on the research topic of workplace stress.
You will construct 3 different research questions that explore this topic. Each question will align to one of the 3 research designs: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods. You will also state which method of data collection you would use to answer each question. For example:
Research question: What is the relationship between burnout and depressive symptoms?
Research design: Quantitative – Longitudinal survey research.
You will briefly discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each design approach and its suitability to answer the associated research question and meaningfully explore the topic.
Please follow the steps below to complete your assessment task:
1. Construct a different research question (3 in total) for each type of research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods.
2. Prepare an oral presentation of 6 PowerPoint slides.
3. The first slide will include your name and the title of your presentation.
4. The second slide will introduce the topic. Provide a brief overview of the topic as it relates to your work environment. Include a justification of why it is an important topic to research. You will need to include key issues and concepts relating to the topic, supported by current literature.
5. The next 3 slides will present each of your 3 research questions. Use 1 slide for each question. Specify the data collection methods you would use to answer each question. Provide 1 advantage and 1 disadvantage of each research design approach in relation to its suitability to explore the research topic.
6. The final slide will be your reference list.
Literature and references
In this assessment use at least 5 contemporary references (< 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. Note, websites such as Stat Pearls, Life in the Fastlane and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task.
Requirements
· Use a conventional and legible font.
· Include page numbers on the bottom right side of each slide.
· 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. Please note, lecture notes are not peer reviewed primary sources of evidence.
· We recommend that you access your discipline specific library guide: the Nursing and Midwifery Guide.
· We recommend you use EndNote to manage your citations and reference list. More information on how to use EndNote is available at the CQUniversity Library website.
· For information on academic communication 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 Basics section.
· You may wish to submit a draft to Studiosity.
· Submit a draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
2. Construct and justify research question/s and their alignment with qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research design/s.
Marking Criteria
Refer to the marking rubric on the Unit Moodle site for more detail on how marks will be assigned.
If you do not receive a passing grade, you may be eligible for a re-attempt. A re-attempt is where you are given a second opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of one or more of the unit’s learning outcomes before you can progress to new learning or participate in subsequent learning activities. You may be given the opportunity to re-attempt an assessment but will only achieve a mark no greater than the minimum for a pass standard for the assessment. You must:
· have shown a reasonable attempt to complete the initial assessment task
· be granted a re-attempt by your Unit Lead/Coordinator
· make changes to the nominated assessment task which you have failed and resubmit the revised work for marking within seven consecutive days, no assessment extensions will be approved.
Please note: Only one opportunity for a re-attempt is allowed.
Week 6 Wednesday (19 Apr 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Week 8 Friday (5 May 2023)
| Key Criteria | High Distinction 100 - 85% | Distinction 84.9 - 75% | Credit 74.9 - 65% | Pass 64.9 - 50% | Fail <49.9% |
| Slide Presentation (10%) | (10 – 8.5) A total of 6 slides used that are very aesthetically pleasing and holds the audience’s attention. The slides are free of unnecessary detail, succinct and readable. The slides contain a very appealing array of appropriate script and graphics. | (8.4 – 7.5) A total of 6 slides used that are aesthetically pleasing and holds the audience’s attention. The slides are free of unnecessary detail, succinct and readable. The slides contain an array of appropriate script and graphics. | (7.4 – 6.5) A total of 6 slides used that are mostly aesthetically pleasing and holds the audience’s attention. The slides are mostly free of unnecessary detail, succinct and readable. The slides contain appropriate script and graphics. | (6.4 – 5) A total of 6 slides used that contained some unnecessary detail but are readable. The slides intermittently held the audience’s attention. The slides contain some appropriate script and graphics. | (4.9 – 0) 6 slides have not been used. The slides are not aesthetically pleasing and infrequently or did not hold the audience’s attention. The slides contained unnecessary or incorrect detail, were cluttered and difficult to read. The slides contained minimal or no appropriate script and graphics. |
| Oral Presentation (10%) | (10 – 8.5) The presenter very readily engages the audience. The presenter speaks very clearly and fluently, demonstrating enthusiasm with the research questions and topic. The research questions are very clearly articulated and justified. Topic and design issues are very clearly presented. The presenter comprehensively addresses the audience’s questions. | (8.4 – 7.5) The presenter readily engages the audience. The presenter speaks clearly, demonstrating enthusiasm with the research questions and topic. The research questions are clearly articulated and justified. Topic and design issues are clearly presented. The presenter clearly addresses the audience’s questions. | (7.4 – 6.5) The presenter engages the audience. The presenter speaks well and demonstrates some enthusiasm on the research questions and topic. The research questions are articulated and mostly justified. Topic and design issues are presented. The presenter effectively addresses the audience’s questions. | (6.4 – 5) The presenter occasionally engages the audience. The presenter speaks well at times and attempts to demonstrate enthusiasm on the research questions and topic. The research questions are stated and partially justified. Topic and design issues are presented but lacks clarity. The presenter mostly addresses the audience’s questions. | (4.9 – 0) The presenter does not engage the audience in the presentation. The presenter does not speak clearly nor demonstrate enthusiasm on research questions and topic. The research question is not stated or justified. Topic and design issues are not clearly presented. The audience questions are not adequately addressed. |
| Construction of research questions (35%) | (35 – 29.75) The research questions are very clearly expressed. The questions very clearly explore the key issues of the topic. The content is comprehensively substantiated with logic, examples and scholarly literature. | (29.74 – 26.25) The research questions are clearly expressed. The questions clearly explore the key issues of the topic. The content is substantiated with logic, examples and scholarly literature. | (26.24 – 22.75) The research questions are mostly clearly expressed. The questions mostly explore the key issues of the topic. The content is mostly substantiated with logic, examples and scholarly literature. | (22.74 – 17.5) The research questions are expressed with some clarity. The questions partially explore the key issues of the topic. The content is at times substantiated with logic, examples and scholarly literature. | (17.49 – 0) The research questions are not clearly expressed. The questions do not explore the key issues of the topic. The content is not substantiated with logic, examples and scholarly literature. |
| Justification of design approach (35%) | (35 – 29.75) The justification of the 3 research design approaches and methods is comprehensive. The alignment between the research questions and the designs are clear and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed clearly and succinctly. | (29.74 – 26.25) The justification of the 3 research design approaches and methods is clear. The alignment between the research questions and the designs are apparent and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed well. | (26.24 – 22.75) The 3 research design approaches and methods are justified. The alignment between the research questions and the designs are mostly apparent, and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach are discussed. | (22.74 – 17.5) The 3 research design approaches and methods are somewhat justified. The alignment between the research questions and the designs lacks clarity and the advantages and disadvantages of each approach are mentioned. | (17.49 – 0) There is minimal discussion of the 3 research design approaches and methods. The alignment between the research questions and the designs are not apparent. The advantages and disadvantages are not mentioned. |
| Use of evidence (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Expertly integrates quality references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations. | (4.2 – 3.8) Consistently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations with 1 or 2 exceptions. | (3.75 – 3.55) Frequently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions. | (3.50 – 2.5) Occasionally integrates references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions. | (2.45 – 0) Infrequent attempts or fails (>6 errors) to integrate references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. |
| Referencing (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Referencing fully adheres to APA 7th style guidelines. | (4.2 – 3.8) Referencing generally adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 1-2 consistent errors. | (3.75 – 3.55) Referencing mostly adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 3-4 consistent errors. | (3.50 – 2.5) Referencing occasionally adheres to APA 7th style guidelines with 5-6 consistent errors. | (2.45 – 0) Referencing does not adhere to APA 7th style guidelines with more than 6 consistent errors. |
- Construct and justify research question/s and their alignment with qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research design/s
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
3 Research Proposal
Type: Written assessment
Length: 3,000 words plus or minus 10% (excluding reference list)
Aim
The aim of this assessment is to write a research proposal to demonstrate your knowledge of research design.
To meet the assessment aim, please engage with the weekly unit material on Moodle. The resources provided will support you to complete this assessment task.
Instructions
You are writing a research proposal on the topic of workplace stress. Select one of the research questions you constructed in Assessment 2. You are required to explain how you will answer your research question using an appropriate research design.
Please follow the structure below to complete your research proposal:
Structure
Title (30 words maximum)
Keywords (5 keywords maximum)
Background and Aims (approximately 800 words)
Provide an overview of the topic selected and the context for your work. Describe what your planned research aims to achieve.
Significance and Impact (approximately 450 words)
Describe the proposed outcomes of your research and associated benefits; for example, improving practice and care provision.
Literature Review (approximately 400 words)
Provide a summary of what is already known on the topic as context for your research.
Research Question/s (approximately 50 words)
State the research question that you are aiming to answer.
Methodology and Methods (approximately 800 words)
Outline the methodology that you will employ. Justify your methodology against the other options available. Describe and justify the research methods you will be using to answer your research question. Detail any data collection tools you will be using, for example questionnaires, screening tools, scales to measure a construct. State the type of sampling you will use, who the participants will be and how they will be recruited. Include the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Summarise your proposed data analysis. Describe how you plan to analyse and report the data to answer the research question.
Ethics (approximately 250 words)
Discuss the ethical considerations relevant to your research methods, for example risks relating to consent, confidentiality, discomfort, and inconvenience.
Conclusion (approximately 200 words)
Summarise the key points of the research proposal. Explain how the proposed research design will answer the research question. Summarise the ethical considerations relevant to the research proposal. Finally, summarise the contribution to knowledge in your area of clinical practice. The conclusion should not include new material.
Reference List
Include at least 10 contemporary references (<5 years).
Literature and references
In this assessment use at least 10 contemporary references (<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. Note, websites such as Stat Pearls, Life in the Fast Lane and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task.
Requirements
· Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman or Arial, with 2.0 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).
· Include page numbers on the top right side of each page in a header.
· You may write in the first or 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 background 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 library guide: the Nursing and Midwifery Guide.
· We recommend you use EndNote to manage your citations and reference list. More information on how to use EndNote is available at the CQUniversity Library website.
· For information on academic communication 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 to Studiosity prior to submission.
· 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.
Marking Criteria
Refer to the marking rubric on the Moodle site for more detail on how marks will be assigned.
If you do not receive a passing grade, you may be eligible for a re-attempt. A re-attempt is where you are given a second opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of one or more of the unit’s learning outcomes before you can progress to new learning or participate in subsequent learning activities. You may be given the opportunity to re-attempt an assessment but will only achieve a mark no greater than the minimum for a pass standard for the assessment. You must:
· have shown a reasonable attempt to complete the initial assessment task
· be granted a re-attempt by your Unit Lead/Coordinator
· make changes to the nominated assessment task which you have failed and resubmit the revised work for marking within seven consecutive days, no assessment extensions will be approved.
Please note: Only one opportunity for a re-attempt is allowed.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
2. Construct and justify research question/s and their alignment with qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research design/s.
3. Propose and justify the research methods for data collection and analysis to answer your research question/s.
4. Discuss ethical considerations relevant to your research proposal.
Week 12 Friday (2 June 2023) 5:00 pm AEST
Exam Week Friday (16 June 2023)
| Key Criteria | High Distinction 100 - 85% | Distinction 84.9 - 75% | Credit 74.9 - 65% | Pass 64.9 - 50% | Fail <49.9% |
| Presentation (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Excellent presentation of assessment according to requirements. Adheres to prescribed word count. | (4.2 – 3.8) Well-presented assessment with 1 formatting error. Adheres to prescribed word count. | (3.75 – 3.55) Good presentation of assessment with 2 formatting errors. Adheres to prescribed word count. | (3.50 – 2.5) An adequately presented assessment with more than 2 formatting errors. Adheres to prescribed word count. | (2.45 – 0) Poorly presented assessment that does not follow requirements. Deviates significantly from prescribed word count. |
| Structure and Design (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Consistently accurate with spelling, grammar and paragraph structure. Organisation and structure clear and easy to follow. | (4.2 – 3.8) Minimal (1-2) critical errors in spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure clear and relatively easy to follow. | (3.75 – 3.55) Few (3-4) critical errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure appropriate and can be followed. | (3.50 – 2.5) Several (5-6) critical errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure. Organisation and structure apparent although not easy to follow. | (2.45 – 0) Many (>6) errors with spelling, grammar or paragraph structure; organisation and structure lacks clarity and is difficult to follow. |
| Background, Aims and Conclusion (25%) | (25 – 21.25) The proposal has a clear and succinct background and conclusion. The background provides current and comprehensive contextual information on the topic, the aims are clearly stated, and the conclusion summarises the key points. | (21. 24 – 8.75) The proposal has a clear background and conclusion. The background provides current contextual information on the topic, the aims are stated, and the conclusion summarises most key points. | (18.74 – 16.25) The proposal has an adequate background and conclusion. The background provides some contextual information on the topic, the aims are stated, and the conclusion summarises some key points. | (16.2 – 12.5) A background and conclusion have been included. The background attempts to provide contextual information on the topic and the conclusion has a few key points. | (12.4 – 0) The proposal does not have a clear and succinct background and conclusion. The background does not provide adequate contextual information on the topic. The conclusion does not summarise the key points. |
| Significance and Impact (10%) | (10 – 8.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are logical, comprehensive and convincing. | (8.4 – 7.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are logical and convincing. | (7.4 – 6.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are convincing. | (6.4 – 5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are somewhat convincing. | (4.9 – 0) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are not convincing. |
| Literature Review (10%) | (10 – 8.5) The literature review is a concise and thorough overview of the key existing research on the topic. | (8.4 – 7.5) The literature review is a thorough overview of the existing research on the topic. | (7.4 – 6.5) The literature review overviews some existing research on the topic. | (6.4 – 5) The literature review inconsistently overviews the existing research on the topic. | (4.9 – 0) The literature review does not provide an overview of the existing research on the topic. |
| Methodology and Methods (25%) | (25 – 21.25) The planned research methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for the project are very clearly outlined and convincingly justified. A very clear plan is included that discusses the instruments, sampling type to be used, and participants and their recruitment. | (21. 24 – 8.75) The planned research methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for the project are clearly outlined and justified. A clear plan is included that discusses the instruments, sampling type to be used, and the participants and their recruitment. | (18.74 – 16.25) The planned research methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for the project are mostly outlined and justified. A plan is included that discusses the instruments, sampling type to be used, and the project participants and their recruitment. | (16.2 – 12.5) The planned research methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for the project are adequately outlined and justified. A plan is included that discusses some aspects of the instruments, sampling type to be used and the participants and their recruitment. | (12.4 – 0) The planned research methodology, methods, data collection and analysis for the project are not outlined or justified. The plan does not cover the instruments, sampling type to be used, project participants or their recruitment. |
| Ethics (10%) | (10 – 8.5) The ethical considerations relevant to the project are comprehensively and concisely outlined. | (8.4 – 7.5) The ethical considerations relevant to the project are concisely outlined. | (7.4 – 6.5) The ethical considerations relevant to the project are clearly outlined. | (6.4 – 5) The ethical considerations relevant to the project are mostly outlined. | (4.9 – 0) The ethical considerations relevant to the project are not outlined. |
| Use of evidence (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Expertly integrates quality references to support and reflect all ideas, factual information and quotations. | (4.2 – 3.8) Consistently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations with 1 or 2 exceptions. | (3.75 – 3.55) Frequently integrates quality references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 3 or 4 exceptions. | (3.50 – 2.5) Occasionally integrates references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations, with 5 or 6 exceptions. | (2.45 – 0) Fails to or infrequent attempts (>6 errors) to integrate references to support and reflect ideas, factual information and quotations. |
| Referencing (5%) | (5 – 4.25) Referencing fully adheres to APA style guidelines. | (4.2 – 3.8) Referencing generally adheres to APA style guidelines with 1-2 consistent errors. | (3.75 – 3.55) Referencing mostly adheres to APA style guidelines with 3-4 consistent errors. | (3.50 – 2.5) Referencing occasionally adheres to APA style guidelines with 5-6 consistent errors. | (2.45 – 0) Referencing does not adhere to APA style guidelines with more than 6 consistent errors. |
- Construct and justify research question/s and their alignment with qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research design/s
- Propose and justify the research methods for data collection and analysis to answer your research question/s
- Discuss ethical considerations relevant to your research proposal.
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
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?
