Overview
This unit introduces you to the foundations of research skills and empirical knowledge required for nursing, midwifery and social sciences research. You will examine research paradigms, and critically examine research design and methodologies related to quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research to develop a research proposal, including ethical considerations, methods, data collection, and data analysis.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Students must be enrolled in CL22 Master of Clinical Nursing to undertake this unit. Co-requisites: NURS20173. Pre-requisites: NURS20167.
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 - 2024
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.
- Critically appraise and justify research paradigms and methods used to answer research questions in contemporary, diverse healthcare settings.
- Construct and justify research question/s appropriate to qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research design.
- Critically analyse ethical and research conduct principles to reduce risk and promote quality outcomes when conducting research in healthcare settings.
- Propose and justify a research paradigm and design to answer your research question, and incorporate methodological rigour to develop credible research outcomes.
There are no learning outcomes linked to external accreditation for this unit.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 60% | ||||
| 2 - Research Proposal - 40% | ||||
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 | ||||
Textbooks
A Guide to Responsible Research
Edition: 1st (2023)
Authors: Marusic, A.
Springer Nature
Cham Cham , Switzerland
ISBN: 978-3-031-22412-6
Binding: eBook
Brown’s evidence-based nursing: the research-practice connection
Edition: 5th (2024)
Authors: Nowak, E. W., & Colsch, R.
Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC
Burlington Burlington , United States of America
Binding: eBook
Introduction to health research methods: a practical guide
Edition: 3rd (2021)
Authors: Jacobsen, K. H.
Jones & Bartlett Learning
Burlington Burlington , United States of America
Binding: eBook
Additional Textbook Information
These textbooks are available through the CQU library.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
- Academic Learning Centre services
- CQ U library search engines for research articles
- CQUniversity library literature search tools
- Microsoft Word
- Wordprocessing, spreadsheeting and powerpoint software
- Zoom account (Free)
- Zoom app on your smart phone or access to Zoom on your laptop
- Endnote bibliographic software. This is optional for formatting references.
- CQUniversity Library Nursing Resources
- CQUniveristy Library Resources
- Zoom (both microphone and webcam capability)
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.
Chapter
Review the Moodle site and click on all the links.
Find out what is in Student Support?
Find out how to find the Library?
Click on the link and learn what is the Academic Learning Centre?
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Recorded presentations:
- Welcome and Unit Introduction O Week.
- Assessments 1 and 2.
Activity – Access the General Discussion page and introduce yourself to your colleagues by providing your:
- Name
- Where you work
- Why you are studying MCN.
Assessments 1 and 2 - Review the assessment tasks and make a study plan.
Foundations of Academic Integrity Program - complete your annual program.
Zoom drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Module/Topic
Qualitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Tutorial and Unit content and assessment question and answer.
Assessment 1 - Start assessment 1 preparation.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Qualitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 1 - Continue progressing your assessment.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Qualitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 1 - Continue progressing your assessment. You might wish to seek assessment preparation help from the Academic Learning Centre and/or Studiosity.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Qualitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 1 - Continue preparing your assessment. You should have your initial draft completed by week 5. You might wish to seek assessment preparation help from the Academic Learning Centre and/or Studiosity.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Vacation week.
Chapter
Please use this mid-term break as an opportunity to rest and recover. Enjoy your break!
Events and Submissions/Topic
No timetabled learning activities.
Please use this week to progress your assessments.
Module/Topic
Quantitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle for details.
Assessment 1 - Check originality of your assessment through Turnitin and make relevant changes to your assessment after reviewing your originality report.
Assessment 2 - Review assessment task again and make a study plan to address this assessment.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Written Assessment Due: Week 6 Wednesday (17 Apr 2024) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Quantitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Start drafting your second assessment. You might wish to seek assessment preparation help from the Academic Learning Centre and/or Studiosity.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Quantitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Continue progressing your second assessment.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Quantitative research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Continue progressing your second assessment. You might wish to seek assessment preparation help from the Academic Learning Centre and/or Studiosity.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Mixed methods research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Continue progressing your second assessment. You might wish to seek assessment preparation help from the Academic Learning Centre and/or Studiosity.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Mixed methods research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Continue preparing your assessment and check originality through Turnitin, make relevant changes to your assessment after reviewing your originality report. Access Studiosity for help with structure/flow/spelling/referencing for your assessment.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Module/Topic
Mixed methods research design and data analysis.
Chapter
Readings and activities as outlined in module.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Zoom - Drop-in session, see Moodle site for details.
Assessment 2 - Check originality of your assessment through Turnitin and make relevant changes to your assessment after reviewing your originality report.
Announcement and Discussion Boards - Check for posts and updates.
Student email - Check your student email at least twice per week for communication.
Research Proposal Due: Week 12 Wednesday (29 May 2024) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Nil.
Chapter
Nil.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Nil.
Module/Topic
Nil.
Chapter
Nil.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Nil.
1 Written Assessment
Aim
The aim of this assessment is for you to:
- Examine your understanding of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms, and
- Construct and justify research questions and explore how they align with different research designs (Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods) using unit material to undertake real-life research.
To meet these aims, please engage with the weekly unit material from Weeks 1–6 where resources are provided that will support you to complete this assessment task. This assessment will inform assessment two in this unit and your assessments in NURS20173 Nursing, Midwifery and Social Sciences Project 1 and NURS20174 Nursing, Midwifery and Social Sciences Project 2.
Instructions
Part A: Knowledge of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms
You are writing an academic essay in Part A of your assessment that demonstrates your understanding of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms.
Please follow the steps below to write your academic essay to complete Part A of this assessment task:
- Provide an introduction outlining the aim of Part A of your assessment (approximately 100 words).
- Briefly define qualitative and quantitative research paradigms (approximately 200 words).
- Critically analyse the fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research paradigms (approximately 1,100 words).
- Provide a concise conclusion summarising the main concepts from your assessment (approximately 100 words).
Part B: Research questions and design
You are writing an academic essay that demonstrates your understanding of the alignment of research questions and research design.
Using the research question you developed in NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing, you will construct three (3) different research questions to explore your research topic that align to each of the three (3) research designs; that is, 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.
Please follow the steps below to write your academic essay and complete Part B of this assessment task:
1. Provide an introduction outlining the aim of your Part B (approximately 100 words).
2. State your research topic and specialty area of nursing practice – this should be no more than one brief sentence (approximately 50 words).
3. 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 (approximately 600 words).
4. Construct three (3) different research questions for each type of research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods. The research question you developed in NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing can be used for one question and align this with the appropriate research design (approximately 50 words).
5. Identify the relevant research design and data collection method you will use to answer each of your three (3) research questions (approximately 600 words):
-
- Justify your choice of research design by providing one (1) advantage and one (1) disadvantage of each research design approach in relation to its suitability to explore the research topic.
6. Use current evidence to support all aspects of this assessment task.
7. Use the following headings to structure Part B of your assessment:
-
- Introduction
- Qualitative research
- Quantitative research
- Mixed methods research
- Conclusion
- References
8. Provide a concise conclusion summarising the main concepts from your assessment (approximately 100 words).
Week 6 Wednesday (17 Apr 2024) 5:00 pm AEST
Submit your assessment in Microsoft Word format only.
Week 9 Wednesday (8 May 2024)
Students will be advised of release of assessment marking via an announcement posted to the Announcement's Board on the Unit Moodle site. Please note, the 'Return to Students Information" is an approximate date.
Assessment One – Written Assessment (Part A – Research Paradigms) Student name:
|
Key Criteria |
High Distinction |
Distinction |
Credit |
Pass |
Fail |
TOTAL |
|
Introduction and conclusion
|
(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 and is written using the student’s own words. |
(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 and is written using the student’s own words. |
(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 and is written using the student’s own words. |
(6.4–5) An essay and conclusion have been attempted. The introduction provides limited background information and an outline of the essay’s direction, and the conclusion has a few key points and is written using the student’s own words. |
(4.9–0) The introduction has significant errors and/or omissions of aims and direction of content or the introduction is not provided. The logical direction of the essay is unclear and/or is not written in the student’s own words. The conclusion does not summarise the assessment or is omitted. |
|
|
Definitions of research paradigms
|
(10–8.5) The essay has a clear and succinct definition of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms and is written using the student’s own words. No content is omitted in the definitions of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Consistently and accurately integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(8.4–7.5) The essay has a clear definition of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms with one incident of content omission and is written using the student’s own words. Consistently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(7.4–6.5) The essay adequately defines qualitative and quantitative research designs with two incidents of content omission and is written using the student’s own work. Frequently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(6.4–5) A definition of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms has been attempted however there are four incidents of content omission. The assessment is written using the student’s own work. Integrates some valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(4.9–0) The definition of qualitative and/or quantitative research has significant errors and/or omissions of content and/or is not written in the student’s own words. Minimal or no integration of valid and/or relevant references are provided to support discussion. |
|
|
Knowledge of major research paradigms
|
(60–50.5) Concise and comprehensive discussion and analysis that demonstrates advanced understanding of fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Consistently and accurately integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(50.4–44.6) Comprehensively discusses and analyses many fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Consistently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(44.4–38.7) A mostly concise discussion and analysis that demonstrates a sound understanding of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Frequently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(38.6–30) Some relevant discussion and some analysis provided demonstrates a reasonable understanding of the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Integrates some valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(29.5–0) Insufficient or omitted discussion and/or analysis provided that demonstrates limited understanding of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Minimal or no integration of valid and/or relevant references are provided to support discussion. |
|
|
Professional writing and presentation
|
(10–8.5) Content is students own work, clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are no errors in English grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 8 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part A and 8 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part B. Formatting requirements applied without error. Adheres to the word count. |
(8.4–7.5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a good understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 1 error. The language of the discipline is frequently used. The assessment is substantiated with 7 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part A and 7 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part B. Formatting requirements applied with 1 error. Adheres to the word count. |
(7.4–6.5) Content is students own work, mostly clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a sound understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 2 errors. The language of the discipline is mostly used. The assessment is substantiated with 6 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part A and 6 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles for Part B. Formatting requirements applied with 2 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(6.4–5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a reasonable understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 3 errors. The language of the discipline is used. The assessment is substantiated with 5 contemporary peer-reviewed mostly appropriate journal articles for Part A and 5 contemporary peer-reviewed mostly appropriate journal articles for Part B. Formatting requirements applied with 3 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(4.9–0) Content is not students own work, consistently unclear or incorrect and is disorganised demonstrating insufficient understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have ≥4 errors. The language of the discipline is infrequently or incorrectly used. The assessment is substantiated with ≤4 contemporary peer-reviewed, appropriate journal articles for Part A and/or ≤4 contemporary peer-reviewed, appropriate journal articles for Part B. Formatting requirements applied with ≥4 errors. Deviates +/- 10% of the word count. |
|
|
Referencing
|
(10–8.5) Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with no errors. Literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(8.4–7.5) Acknowledges majority of sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 1 error. The majority of literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(7.4–6.5) Acknowledges most sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 2 errors. Most literature cited has been published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(6.4–5.0) Acknowledges sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 3 errors. Some literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(4.9–0) Multiple sources not acknowledged and/or ≥4 APA (7th Edition) referencing errors or references not provided. Some literature cited is published ≥5 years and/or not sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
|
|
TOTAL: |
MARKER: |
|||||
|
Marker’s feedback:
|
||||||
Assessment One –Written Assessment (Part B – Research questions) Student name:
|
Key Criteria |
High Distinction |
Distinction |
Credit |
Pass |
Fail |
TOTAL |
|
Introduction and conclusion
|
(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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(6.4–5) An essay and conclusion have been attempted. The introduction provides limited background information and an outline of the essay’s direction, and the conclusion has a few key points and is written in the student’s own words. |
(4.9–0) The introduction has significant errors and/or omissions of aims and direction of content or the introduction is not provided. The logical direction of the essay is unclear and/or is not written in the students own words. The conclusion does not summarise the assessment or is omitted. |
|
|
Relevance of research topic to work environment
|
(10–8.5) The research topic is clearly stated. Relevance of the research topic to the specialty practice is concisely and comprehensively articulated and justified. Consistently and accurately integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(8.4–7.5) The research topic is clearly stated. Relevance of the research topic to the specialty practice is comprehensively articulated and justified. Consistently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(7.4–6.5) The research topic is adequately stated. Relevance of the research topic to the specialty practice is articulated and justified. Frequently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(6.4–5) The research topic is stated. Relevance of the research topic to the specialty practice is articulated, however there are gaps in some discussion and/or justification. Integrates some valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(4.9–0) The research topic is insufficiently stated or omitted. Relevance of the research topic to the specialty practice is insufficiently articulated or omitted. Justification of the significance of the research topic to the specialty practice is insufficiently articulated or is omitted. Minimal or no integration of valid and relevant references provided to support discussion. |
|
|
Construction of research questions
|
(30–25.5) The three research questions are very clearly presented and, in the student’s, own words. The questions comprehensively explore the key issues of the topic. The content is comprehensively substantiated with logic, examples, and scholarly literature.
|
(25.4–22.4) The three research questions are clearly expressed and, in the student’s, own words. The questions clearly explore the key issues of the topic. The content is substantiated with logic, examples, and scholarly literature. |
(22.3–19.4) The three research questions are mostly clearly expressed and, in the student’s, own words. The questions mostly explore the key issues of the topic. The content is mostly substantiated with logic, examples, and scholarly literature. |
(19.3–15) The three research questions are expressed with some clarity and in the student’s own words. The questions partially explore the key issues of the topic. The content is at times substantiated with logic, examples, and scholarly literature. |
(14.9–0) The three research questions are not clearly expressed and/or are not written using the student’s own words. 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
|
(30–25.5) The justification of the three 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. The data collection method is very appropriate for the research design approaches and is supported by valid and relevant research.
|
(25.4–22.4) The justification of the three 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. The data collection method is appropriate for the research design approaches and is supported by valid and relevant research. |
(22.3–19.4) The three 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. The data collection method is mostly appropriate for the research design approaches and is supported by valid and relevant research. |
(19.3–15) The three 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. The data collection method is stated for the research design approaches and is supported by valid and relevant research. |
(14.9–0) There is minimal discussion of the three research design approaches and methods. The alignment between the research questions and the designs are not apparent. The advantages and disadvantages are not mentioned. The data collection method is not appropriate for the research design approaches or is omitted and/or is not supported by valid and relevant research. |
|
|
Professional writing and presentation
|
(10–8.5) Content is students own work, clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are no errors in English grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 15, appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied without error. Adheres to the word count. |
(8.4–7.5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a good understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 1 error. The language of the discipline is frequently used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 13 or 14 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 1 error. Adheres to the word count. |
(7.4–6.5) Content is students own work, mostly clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a sound understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 2 errors. The language of the discipline is mostly used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 11 or 12 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 2 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(6.4–5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a reasonable understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 3 errors. The language of the discipline is used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 10 or 11 contemporary peer-reviewed mostly appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 3 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(4.9–0) Content is not students own work, consistently unclear or incorrect and is disorganised demonstrating insufficient understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have ≥4 errors. The language of the discipline is infrequently or incorrectly used. The assessment is substantiated with ≤10 contemporary peer-reviewed, appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with ≥4 errors. Deviates +/- 10% of the word count. |
|
|
Referencing
|
(10–8.5) Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with no errors. Literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(8.4–7.5) Acknowledges majority of sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 1 error. The majority of literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(7.4–6.5) Acknowledges most sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 2 errors. Most literature cited has been published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(6.4–5.0) Acknowledges sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 3 errors. Some literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(4.9–0) Multiple sources not acknowledged and/or ≥4APA (7th Edition) referencing errors or references not provided. Some literature cited is published ≥5 years and/or not sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
|
|
TOTAL: |
MARKER: |
|||||
|
Marker’s feedback:
|
||||||
- Critically appraise and justify research paradigms and methods used to answer research questions in contemporary, diverse healthcare settings.
- Construct and justify research question/s appropriate to qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research design.
2 Research Proposal
Aim
The aim of this assessment is to write a research proposal to demonstrate your knowledge and justification of research design.
Instructions
In this assessment, you will write a research proposal using your research question you developed in NURS20167 Literature Review in Health, Safety and Wellbeing. The focus of this research proposal is the justification of the research method you will use to answer your research question.
Please follow the structure below to complete your research proposal:
1. Provide a title for your research proposal (30 words maximum).
2. Keywords (three keywords maximum).
3. Background and aims:
-
- Provide a brief overview of the topic selected and the context for your work. Describe what your planned research aims to achieve (approximately 300 words).
4. Significance and impact:
-
- Describe the proposed outcomes of your research and associated benefits; for example, improving practice and care provision (approximately 200 words).
5. Literature review:
-
- Provide a summary of what is already known on the topic as context for your research (approximately 300 words).
6. Research question/s:
-
- State your research question/s (approximately 50 words).
7. Methodology and methods
-
- 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 (approximately 1,250 words).
8. Ethics:
-
- Identify the ethical considerations relevant to your research methods, for example risks relating to consent, confidentiality, discomfort, and inconvenience (approximately 200 words).
9. Conclusion:
-
- 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. The conclusion should not include new material (approximately 150 words).
Week 12 Wednesday (29 May 2024) 5:00 pm AEST
Submit your assessment in Microsoft Word format only.
Exam Week Wednesday (12 June 2024)
Students will be advised of release of assessment marking via an announcement posted to the Announcement's Board on the Unit Moodle site. Please note, the 'Return to Students Information" is an approximate date.
Assessment Two – Research Proposal Student name:
|
Key Criteria |
High Distinction |
Distinction |
Credit |
Pass |
Fail |
TOTAL |
|
Background, aims and conclusion |
(15–12.75) 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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(12.74–11.25) 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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(11.24–9.75) 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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(9.74–7.5) 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 and is written in the student’s own words. |
(7.4–0) The proposal does not have a clear and succinct background and conclusion and/or is not written in the student’s own words. The background does not provide adequate contextual information on the topic. The conclusion does not summarise the key points. |
|
|
Significance and Impact
|
(10–8.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are logical, comprehensive, and convincing and is written in the student’s own words. |
(8.4–7.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are logical and convincing and is written in the student’s own words. |
(7.4–6.5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are convincing and is written in the student’s own words. |
(6.4–5) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are somewhat convincing and is written in the student’s own words. |
(4.9–0) The descriptions of the significance and impact of the project are not convincing and/or is not written in the student’s own words. |
|
|
Literature review
|
(10–8.5) The literature review is a concise and thorough overview of the key existing research on the topic. Consistently and accurately integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(8.4–7.5) The literature review is a thorough overview of the existing research on the topic. Consistently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(7.4–6.5) The literature review overviews some existing research on the topic. Frequently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(6.4–5) The literature review inconsistently overviews the existing research on the topic. Integrates some valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(4.9–0) The literature review does not provide an overview of the existing research on the topic. Minimal or no integration of valid and/or relevant references provided to support discussion. |
|
|
Methodology and methods |
(30–25.5) 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. Consistently and accurately integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(25–22.5) 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. Consistently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(22–19.5) 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. Frequently integrates valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(19–15) 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. Integrates some valid and relevant references to support discussion. |
(14.5–0) 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. Minimal or no integration of valid and/or relevant references provided to support discussion. |
|
|
Ethics |
(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. |
|
|
Professional writing and presentation
|
(10–8.5) Content is students own work, clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are no errors in English grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 15, appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied without error. Adheres to the word count. |
(8.4–7.5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a good understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 1 error. The language of the discipline is frequently used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 13 or 14 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 1 error. Adheres to the word count. |
(7.4–6.5) Content is students own work, mostly clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a sound understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 2 errors. The language of the discipline is mostly used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 11 or 12 appropriate contemporary peer-reviewed journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 2 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(6.4–5) Content is students own work, frequently clear, correct, and presented in a logical order demonstrating a reasonable understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have 3 errors. The language of the discipline is used. The assessment is substantiated with a minimum of 10 or 11 contemporary peer-reviewed mostly appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with 3 errors. Adheres to the word count. |
(4.9–0) Content is not students own work, consistently unclear or incorrect and is disorganised demonstrating insufficient understanding of the topic. English grammar, spelling, and punctuation conventions have ≥4 errors. The language of the discipline is infrequently or incorrectly used. The assessment is substantiated with ≤10 contemporary peer-reviewed, appropriate journal articles. Formatting requirements applied with ≥4 errors. Deviates +/- 10% of the word count. |
|
|
Referencing
|
(10–8.5) Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with no errors. Literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(8.4–7.5) Acknowledges majority of sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 1 error. The majority of literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(7.4–6.5) Acknowledges most sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 2 errors. Most literature cited has been published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(6.4–5.0) Acknowledges sources and/or meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 3 errors. Some literature cited is published in the last 5 years and sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(4.9–0) Multiple sources not acknowledged and/or ≥4 APA (7th Edition) referencing errors or references not provided. Some literature cited is published ≥5 years and/or not sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
|
|
TOTAL: |
MARKER: |
|||||
|
Marker’s feedback:
|
||||||
- Critically appraise and justify research paradigms and methods used to answer research questions in contemporary, diverse healthcare settings.
- Construct and justify research question/s appropriate to qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research design.
- Critically analyse ethical and research conduct principles to reduce risk and promote quality outcomes when conducting research in healthcare settings.
- Propose and justify a research paradigm and design to answer your research question, and incorporate methodological rigour to develop credible research outcomes.
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?
