CQUniversity Unit Profile
PPMP20015 Research in Project Management
Research in Project Management
All details in this unit profile for PPMP20015 have been officially approved by CQUniversity and represent a learning partnership between the University and you (our student).
The information will not be changed unless absolutely necessary and any change will be clearly indicated by an approved correction included in the profile.
General Information

Overview

This unit provides the essential skills and techniques for designing, implementing and evaluating research in the project management discipline. It provides an in-depth introduction to the critical thinking and planning required in the initial stages of the research project. You will undertake research problem definition and articulate a research question. Then you will learn how to design your research and you will gain many skills associated with conducting research. You will also consider qualitative and quantitative methods, and justify the most appropriate approach for your project with the final outcome of the unit being the development of a full research proposal. This unit is designed as the pre-requisite for the work you will undertake in your final year Research Project in which you will implement your developed research proposal.

Details

Career Level: Postgraduate
Unit Level: Level 9
Credit Points: 6
Student Contribution Band: 10
Fraction of Full-Time Student Load: 0.125

Pre-requisites or Co-requisites

Pre-requisites: PPMP20007, PPMP20008, PPMP20009 and PPMP20010Co-requisites: PPMP20011, PPMP20012

Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).

Offerings For Term 2 - 2018

Brisbane
Distance
Melbourne
Perth
Sydney

Attendance Requirements

All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).

Class and Assessment Overview

Recommended Student Time Commitment

Each 6-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.

Class Timetable

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

Assessment Overview

1. Critical Review
Weighting: 20%
2. Research Proposal
Weighting: 80%

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.

Previous Student Feedback

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 Teaching team.

Feedback

Class attendance and in-class participation was relatively low.

Recommendation

Innovative measures (e.g Mentimeter) should be introduced to improve student engagement and entertainment in class. Certain marks should be allocated for class participation in the assessment design.

Feedback from Teaching team.

Feedback

Some students elected to engage in contract cheating practice in this unit.

Recommendation

Assessment design should be more authentic and personalised to stimulate active participation and thus deter contract cheating.

Feedback from Student Evaluations in Moodle and student emails.

Feedback

This unit is well designed, structured and delivered. The teaching staff are very committed, approachable and engaging. The unit offers a very challenging and enjoyable environment to students.

Recommendation

Continue with current teaching and learning practices.

Feedback from Student Evaluation in Moodle.

Feedback

Self and peer assessment has improved the understanding of assignment and attainment of learning outcomes.

Recommendation

Self and peer assessment should remain as an integral part of the assessment design.

Feedback from Student Evaluation in Moodle.

Feedback

Group discussion and involvement in each others research project was limited in tutorials.

Recommendation

Tutorial activities should be revisited to ensure that group based problem solving exercises are included. Assessment design should include group-based assessments.

Unit Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
  1. Apply project management processes, tools and techniques in articulating, designing and planning for the execution of a research project
  2. Develop and employ ethical practices that consider social, cultural and legal responsibilities of researchers
  3. Conduct a literature search to identify a problem that warrants research within the project management context
  4. Select appropriate research approaches, methods and skills for solving the research problem
  5. Prepare a research proposal with necessary components that describe an organised, coherent and convincing statement of the research intent, significance and strategies to conduct the research.


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

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes

Assessment Tasks Learning Outcomes
1 2 3 4 5
1 - Critical Review - 20%
2 - Research Proposal - 80%

Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes

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

Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes

Assessment Tasks Graduate Attributes
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 - Critical Review - 20%
2 - Research Proposal - 80%
Textbooks and Resources

Textbooks

There are no required textbooks.

Additional Textbook Information

NA

IT Resources

You will need access to the following IT resources:
  • CQUniversity Student Email
  • Internet
  • Unit Website (Moodle)
  • CQ university Library resourses for research
  • EndNote Bibliographical application
Referencing Style

All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Harvard (author-date)

For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.

Teaching Contacts
Samer Skaik Unit Coordinator
s.skaik@cqu.edu.au
Schedule
Week 1: Selection of Research Topic Begin Date: 09 Jul 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Overview of the research stream
  2. Overview of the unit and the assessment tasks
  3. Introduction to research in project management

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities: 
  1. Ice-breaking activity 
  2. Select a research topic using a supplied research topic generation tool.
Week 2: Literature Review Begin Date: 16 Jul 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Selection of research topic
  2. Searching for literature
  3. Writing annotated bibliography
  4. Writing literature review

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Continue with the selection and refinement of the topic using the supplied tool.
  2. Library search for scholarly resources relevant to the selected topic
  3. Check credibility of journals
Week 3: Research Problem Begin Date: 23 Jul 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Industry problem vs research problem
  2. Identify research problem or gap.
  3. Assignment 1 explained.

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Analyse a supplied journal article at home and draft a summary of the paper in your own words.
  2. Check similarities percentage of the summary via Turnitin.
  3. Discuss your analysis in the class.
  4. Revise and record the updated paper summary in the tutorial activity forum.
Week 4: Research Question Begin Date: 30 Jul 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Framing research questions
  2. Framing research hypothesis
  3. Formulating research objectives.

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Quiz competition on research concepts
  2. Training on self & peer assessment and giving feedback to your peers.
  3. Face to face individual consultation with tutor-Assignment 1.

Milestones:


Critical Review Report Due: Week 4 Friday (3 Aug 2018) 11:55 pm AEST
Week 5: Research Approach Begin Date: 06 Aug 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Research design
  2. Qualitative vs quantitative research
  3. Aligning research questions with the research approach
  4. Introduction to research methods
  5. Group forming process -explained.

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Group forming and enrolment for assignment 2. Attendance is compulsory.
  2. Negotiate, complete & sign off the group charter then upload it in Moodle.

Milestones:

Self and Peer Assessment of Critical Review Report Due: Week 5 Friday (10 Aug 2018) 17:00 pm AEST

Vacation Week: Enjoy your break Begin Date: 13 Aug 2018

Module/Topic

Enjoy your well deserved  break! It is also an opportunity to catch up with your new group member and go through online resources that you have not yet read. This may help you come back on track and start afresh.

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic


Week 6: Research Methods Begin Date: 20 Aug 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Decide suitable research methods and tactics to test the research questions.
  2. Assignment 2A explained

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Quiz competition on research methodology.
  2. Complete an informal unit interim evaluation in class
  3. Prioritise project ideas and decide the group research topic
  4. Create a free account in Asana.com to start developing the project timeline and delegating tasks for completing the deliverables of assignment 2.
Week 7: Research Project Management Begin Date: 27 Aug 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Apply a project management methodology in planning and executing research projects
  2. An interactive quiz to apply the principles of research project management

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Group activities on what, why and how of the research project to facilitate completing assignment 2A.
Week 8: Research proposal Begin Date: 03 Sep 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Develop detailed research proposal.
  2. Understand how the supplied template works.

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Face to face group consultation with tutor - Assignment 2A.
  2. Formative self & peer assessment of group performance (Strongly recommended).

Milestones:

Outline Research Proposal Due: Week 8 Friday (7 Sep 2018) 17:00 pm AEST

Week 9: Research Ethics Begin Date: 10 Sep 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Conduct ethical research
  2. Responsibilities of researchers
  3. Assignment 2B explained

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Discussion on corrective actions to improve group performance following the formative group self and peer assessment
  2. Group activity to complete ethics documentation of the research project.
Week 10: Data Collection Begin Date: 17 Sep 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Data collection purpose and methods
  2. Questionnaire design.
  3. Do and don't in data collection stage.
  4. Assignment 2C explained

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Group oral presentations and discussions (Attendance is compulsory)
  2. Group peer assessment of presentations.

Milestones:

Oral Presentations Due: Week 10 Monday (17 Sep 2018) 8:00 am AEST

Week 11: Ad Hoc Topic Begin Date: 24 Sep 2018

Module/Topic

This week is left flexible. A topic will be decided in accordance with students' needs and interests.

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Group workshop to facilitate completing the work breakdown structure and schedule for execution and closing phases of the research project.

 



Week 12: Execution of Research Proposal Begin Date: 01 Oct 2018

Module/Topic

Lecture topics:
  1. Collect requirements to plan for the execution phase.
  2. How to execute the research proposal
  3. Group self and peer assessment explained.
  4. Final remarks

Chapter

Review the online resources within the relevant section of this week in Moodle site.

Events and Submissions/Topic

Tutorial activities:
  1. Endnote software training in the computer lab (Compulsory).

Milestones:


Research Proposal Due: Week 12 Friday (5 Oct 2018) 11:55 pm AEST
Week 13: Group Evaluation Begin Date: 08 Oct 2018

Module/Topic

Chapter

Events and Submissions/Topic

  1. An email will be sent to each student with a link to complete a compulsory survey for group self and peer assessment

Milestones:

Group Self and Peer Assessment Due: Week 13 Wednesday (10 Oct 2018) 17:00 pm AEST

Term Specific Information

We have adopted an entirely different approach this term to facilitate your learning and active engagement in this unit. We split the learning journey of this unit into two stages. The first stage requires you to work individually from week one to week four. The second stage requires you to work in a group from week five until the end of the term. You will have the opportunity in the first four weeks to work individually to research a topic of your choice which is aligned with your interest and/or career goals. The first assignment requires you to submit a report on a selected topic and propose a few research questions. The report will be assessed by yourself and your peers during week five. In subsequent weeks, you will enrol and work in a group comprising of three to six students until the end of the term to complete all parts of the second assignment. The creation of groups will take place in week five following the census date. Group forming will be semi-random to ensure diversity of levels of achievement, backgrounds and skills. Your performance and engagement as a group member will be self and peer assessed by the end of the term to reflect the actual efforts you invested in contributing to the group assignment.

Assessment Tasks

1 Critical Review

Assessment Title
Critical Review Report

Task Description

Rationale:

Project management discipline is continually evolving. There is currently an overwhelming body of research that was conducted to fill a knowledge gap by contributing to existing literature, improving processes or exploring best practices in various aspects of project management. According to the Australian Qualification Framework, master degree students (level 9) must demonstrate competencies in research and critical thinking to be capable of advancing their discipline and/or resolving industry problems. This unit requires you to successfully complete the conception and planning phases of your research project lifecycle.

Overview

This individual assignment covers the conception phase of the research project. It tests your essential research competencies needed to identify a knowledge gap or a problem in the context of project management discipline that warrants research. It primarily assesses your understanding and level of engagement with learning resources at an early stage of the inquiry process. The assignment must be your own piece of work. You must not plagiarise, collude with others or get involved in contract cheating (i.e. by seeking help from friends or commercial providers in writing or helping you with this assignment). That is a serious academic offence that may eventually result in suspension or expulsion from CQUniversity.

Assignment 1 (Critical Review Report) consists of two deliverables or parts:

  1. Assignment 1A, 15%: Critical Review Report, due by end of week 4
  2. Assignment 1B, 5%: Self and peer assessment of the report, due by end of week 5

Note: Each part will receive a mark of ZERO if not completed by the given deadline to complete the work.

Task

Assignment 1A:

Assignment 1A requires you to choose an initial research topic using a supplied research topic generation tool. Next, you will conduct a literature search to identify relevant scholarly sources. You will provide a summary of the most relevant scholarly article using your own words. You will then critically evaluate the article by identifying patterns, themes, similarities and differences as compared with the other articles you have identified. The evaluation process should lead you to identify a potential gap or an opportunity that may warrant further research. This gap or opportunity can be distilled from any explicit or implicit limitations, recommendation of further research and/or flaws in that article. If you are unable to identify such gap, it is acceptable that, with justification, you opt to replicate the research reported in that article in a different context, country or perspective. As a logical conclusion of this assessment task, you must derive up to two preliminary research questions to address the gap or the opportunity. You must also include a screenshot of Turnitin similarity report showing the similarity percentage. Then, you will provide your personal reflection of your learning experience in this phase. The reflection should record your experiences, feelings and reactions during the entire phase. This may include your commentary on Turnitin similarity percentage and evaluation of the adopted approaches, techniques or tutorial activities that have been helpful or unhelpful. You must also reflect on the consultation process you have had with your lecturer/tutor, peers and Moodle sources.

Specifications:

Your critical review report should not exceed 1200 words. The report must substantially include the following components:

  1. A description of the topic using a supplied tool.
  2. A table of four relevant articles (presented in Harvard format) and keywords or combination of keywords used to identify each article.
  3. A summary of the most relevant article to the topic. (up to 300 words).
  4. A critical appraisal of the article. (up to 300 words)
  5. Preliminary research questions.
  6. A screenshot of the Turnitin similarity report.
  7. Your personal reflection. (up to 300 words)

Please note the following details:

  • You must remove any detail identifying your name in the submission.
  • Submit your report via Workshop Platform in Moodle.
  • As a guideline, the length of the report should not exceed a maximum of 1000-1200 words.
  • Referencing should be in a consistent style - typically Harvard formats.
  • Upload your file in a Word format only (.doc or .docx).

Assignment 1B

Assignment 1B requires you to assess two reports submitted by your peers as randomly assigned to you. You must also self-assess your report. You will conduct the assessment using a supplied marking tool. Peers will communicate the submissions and assessments double-blindly. You must be objective and careful when assessing yourself and other students. You must provide constructive and adequate comments to your peers. Your lecturer will monitor the peer assessment for quality assurance.

Further details and training about self and peer assessment process will be provided in Moodle site.


Assessment Due Date

Week 4 Friday (3 Aug 2018) 11:55 pm AEST


Return Date to Students

Week 5 Friday (10 Aug 2018)

You will receive two marks: one for the quality of submission and the other one for the quality of assessment.


Weighting
20%

Assessment Criteria

Assignment 1A:

Assessment will be done according to presentation, accuracy and coverage of the content for each part of the assignment 1 as set out under 'Specifications' section. The Turnitin similarity percentage must not exceed 10%. A marking tool will be available in Moodle to ease the assessment process. The final mark for assignment 1A is the average of the marks given by yourself and reviewers. 

Assignment 1B:

You will also receive marks for the quality of assessing yourself and assessing others' submissions. Moodle will compare your assessment with your peers' assessments. Based on how close your assessment is to the best assessment of the submission, you will receive a score for the quality of your assessments. The system picks one of the assessments to be the best assessment that is closest to the mean of all assessments - and gives it a grade of 100%. Then it measures the 'distance' of your assessments from this best one and gives them lower grades depending on how different they are from the best assessment (given that the best one represents a consensus of the majority of assessors). 

The maximum Marks will be allocated as per the following table:

Assignment tasks Mark allocation
1A mark: Mark of your submission assessed by yourself and peers 15 marks
1B mark: Mark for assessing yourself and your peers' submissions 5 marks


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Apply project management processes, tools and techniques in articulating, designing and planning for the execution of a research project
  • Develop and employ ethical practices that consider social, cultural and legal responsibilities of researchers
  • Conduct a literature search to identify a problem that warrants research within the project management context


Graduate Attributes
  • Knowledge
  • Communication
  • Cognitive, technical and creative skills
  • Research
  • Self-management
  • Ethical and Professional Responsibility
  • Leadership

2 Research Proposal

Assessment Title
Research Proposal

Task Description

ASSIGNMENT TASK

Rationale:

Planning for a research project may be a complex undertaking. Collaboration is a useful and standard approach to plan effective and high-quality research projects. Working in groups will ensure that students will learn from each other and benefit from the diversity of their experiences, backgrounds and capabilities. Group setting fosters a positive learning experience that contributes to student learning, attainment of learning outcomes and overall success. It also encourages group members to develop and apply project management competencies including teamwork, leadership, time management, conflict management and communication. This group assignment will give you the opportunity to take ownership and be an active participant in the learning journey for the remaining duration of this unit. This fundamental assignment tests your understanding of all unit learning outcomes of this unit. Successful completion of this assignment will trigger the end of the (Planning Phase) of your research project.

Overview:

This is a group assignment. It comprises 80% of the total mark of this unit. You must achieve a minimum score of 50% of the available marks of this assignment task to pass this unit. The assignment is designed to encourage students to teach each other to improve understanding of various aspects of the research planning process through additional discussion and explanation. The ultimate goal is to develop a viable research proposal of high academic standards. The assignment consists of four deliverables or parts:

  1. Part 2A, 10%: Outline Research Proposal, due in week 8
  2. Part 2B, 10%: Oral presentations of proposals, due in week 10
  3. Part 2C, 40%: Detailed Research Proposal, due in week 12
  4. Part 2D, 20%: Group self and peer assessment (performance evaluation), due in week 13

Group forming

The Unit coordinator will form your group in week five. Each group will comprise 3-6 students depending on the number of students enroled in each class or setting. Group members will be assigned semi-randomly. Then, each group member must enrol in his/her group online. Your group leader will be assigned by the Unit Coordinator. The group must negotiate the group rules by filling in a group charter. Your group must meet on a weekly basis, ideally during tutorial sessions for on-campus students and via Zoom for distance students until the end of the term. Interim evaluation of group performance will take place by end of week 8. Support will be given to dysfunctional groups to facilitate their corrective actions to work more efficiently.

Note: Your contributions to the assignment as a group member must be your own piece of work. You MUST not plagiarise, collude with others or get involved in contract cheating (i.e. by seeking help from friends or commercial providers in writing or helping you with this assignment). That is a serious academic offence that may result in suspension or expulsion from CQUniversity.

Task:

Part 2A: Outline Research Proposal (10%)

This is the first deliverable of your group that will be due in week 8. The task requires your group to develop an outline proposal of approximately 1500 words excluding references with key information about your intended project. This document essentially outlines the what, why and how of the group research project.  Your group will discuss the research ideas of each group member as explained in the conception phase, prioritise each project idea and eventually agree upon the group research topic for further adoption in assignment 2. In case of disagreement, your group must adopt the topic of a group member who has achieved the highest overall mark in assignment 1.

You should use the guidelines provided within the detailed research proposal template (see Part 2C) for completing the required sections as applicable. The outline proposal should include the following components.

  1. A description of the final research topic
  2. A brief rationale to justify the need and significance for the project.
  3. Research questions or hypothesis (up to three questions)
  4. A brief Methodology
  5. Expected research findings and their implication.
  6. A list of recent main scholarly articles relevant to your group topic that will inform your literature review. (List a minimum of 10 papers using Harvard style)

Part 2B: Oral presentations (10%)

This is the second deliverable of your group and is due in week 10. Your group must prepare a strict 8-slide PowerPoint presentation file (excluding the title slide and references) to present your intended research project. The presentation must adequately cover the critical elements of your detailed research proposal excluding project management part. Presentations will take place during tutorial sessions in week 10 for on-campus students and via Zoom for distance students. Each group will present its project to the respective tutor and peers. Each group will have strict 10 minutes of presentation time plus 5 minutes of Q&A and feedback time (10+5=15 mins). Each group must select one or two group members to make the presentation on behalf of the group. However, each group member is expected to join the presenter(s) and be ready to answer any question by the tutor. Students who are not available during the presentation may be penalised. Exceeding the time limits for presentation will encounter mark deductions; therefore, you are encouraged to have adequate rehearsal in advance.

Part 2C: Detailed Research Proposal (40%)

Developing a detailed research proposal is the third and most important deliverable of the assignment. The proposal is effectively your research project plan. You should think of it as a document that should be detailed enough so anyone else can use your plan to execute the project. You must consider the feedback received during oral presentations seminars to improve your research proposal.

The proposal should include the following sections. A template will be supplied with sufficient guidelines to complete each section.

  1. Self-assessment (by ticking the boxes of a given checklist)
  2. Title: Develop a concise title that indicates the overall purpose of your study (15 words).
  3. Abstract: Summarize the significant elements of your proposal (200 words)
  4. The rationale for the study: Provide a research background and explain a suitable gap in project management literature that warrants research (800 words)
  5. Significance: (200 words) Explain the importance and possible implications of the outcomes emerging from the proposed research.
  6. The research question, hypothesis and objectives: Define the problem in the form of a research question, hypothesis and objectives.
  7. Research Design: (200 words) Select and justify a research design or methodological approach to solve the problem.
  8. Data collection: (800 words) Select and justify the data collection method, procedures, sampling plan, instrumentation, ethics protocol, etc.
  9. Preliminary literature review: (2000 words) Conduct a preliminary literature review of the most relevant arguments by other scholars relating to the chosen topic (a minimum of ten scholarly refereed papers).
  10. Research Project Management: Include project plans and/or documentation as per the guidelines in the supplied template.
  11. Responsibility matrix: The main contributions of each group member in this part of the assignment.
  12. References and NOT bibliography.
  13. Appendices: Provide a list of items included in the proposal and provide a shared link to access the folder where these documents are located. The shared folder must include the following documentation:
  • Project Schedule using MS Project including Gantt Chart
  • The draft of data collection instrument (questionnaire survey, interview schedule, etc.)
  • The draft of Ethics submission documentation.

Make sure that you are fully aware of the assignment requirements and the assessment rubric. Your group must submit the research proposal in WORD format (DOC or DOCx). Make sure that you allow sufficient time to consult Studiosity and Turnitin before the final submission.

Part 2D: Group Self and Peer Assessment (Performance Evaluation) (20%)

Evaluation of group members is the fourth and last deliverable of the assignment. At the beginning of week 13, you will receive an email from the Unit Coordinator inviting you to respond to a compulsory survey. You must respond by the given deadline, mentioned in that email which will be around the end of week 13. The survey includes many rating questions using a 5-point Likert scale format. The survey aims to evaluate the performance of each group member regarding leadership, attendance of group meetings, timely action, cooperation, quality of contribution, etc. You must self-rate your performance as well as rate each member of your group against the given criteria. You must respond to the survey independently and privately. You must be objective and honest in your assessment as you may be penalised if your assessment is found to lack objectivity. To ensure accurate assessment, it is worthwhile to keep a private diary to record incidents that might help you complete the survey. Incidents could include positive or negative impressions about a group member regarding engagement in discussions, regular attendance at group meetings, quality of contributions, academic integrity, and adherence to deadlines. The survey results will then be used as a basis to calculate your mark. In calculating and finalising your mark, other factors will be considered including, but not limited to, your group ability to resolve conflicts and delegate tasks as well as, the group members' level of participation and engagement with online resources, lecture-discussions, tutorial activities, teaching staff and peers to ensure consistency and objectivity.


Assessment Due Date

Week 12 Friday (5 Oct 2018) 11:55 pm AEST


Return Date to Students

Provisional results will be made available after two weeks from submission.


Weighting
80%

Minimum mark or grade
50%

Assessment Criteria

Part 2A: Outline research Proposal

This part will be assessed based on the following criteria:

  1. The accuracy and viability of the research project (40%).
  2. Alignment between all sections of the proposal (20%).
  3. Relevance and credibility of cited scholarly sources (20%).
  4. The format, language and presentation (20%).

Part 2B: Oral Presentations

This part will be assessed based on the following criteria

  1. Clear alignment between rationale, research questions and methodology (20%).
  2. Research is presented in a coherent & logical sequence (20%).
  3. The presentation contains sufficient, accurate and focused information (20%).
  4. Ability to answer questions competently (20%).
  5. Length of presentation is within the assigned time limits (10%).
  6. Overall quality of the presentation (10%).

Part 2C: Detailed Research Proposal.

The below rubric will be used for marking this part:

HD D C P F
Rationale and Significance (20%) Project is original in its approach and will contribute to project management development. Significance emerges logically from construction of argument in addition to being clearly articulated. Project is justified and will consolidate understanding in project management. Significance emerges from construction of argument in addition to being articulated. Project is relevant and will consolidate student’s understanding of project management. Significance does not emerge easily in argument but it is evident in addition to being outlined. Project replicates well established understanding in project management. Significance is stated but does not emerge from argument. Project is too simplistic or disorganised to offer any significance.
Research Questions, Hypothesis & Objectives (10%) Original and highly relevant research questions/hypothesis are clearly articulated. The specified RQs are well align with the project focus. Objectives are concisely elaborated and aligned with RQs. Clearly relevant research questions/hypothesis are determined. Objectives are well formulated. Relevant research questions/ hypothesis outlined, but could be tighter in their focus. Objectives are identified and mostly relevant to project. Research questions/ hypothesis outlined but lacking in clarity, relevance to project focus. Objectives are described in broad terms only. Research questions/ hypothesis are missing, unclear or so poorly written and irrelevant to project. Objectives are missing or poorly articulated.
Research Approach and Methods (20%) Research approach and data collection method are exceptionally articulated, justified and detailed. Details include data collection instruments, diagrams and complete ethics documentation. Research approach and data collection method are well argued, justified and detailed. Research approach and data collection method are explained and appropriate for the project. Research approach and data collection method are broadly outlined, but details are not always clear. Research approach and data collection method are either not appropriate for the project or are poorly articulated suggesting deficits in understanding.
Preliminary Literature Review (20%) Creative and highly organised literature review that outlines the context for the research project. Critical appraisal of the key previous research relevant to the study clearly evident throughout. Well-argued and logical literature review that provides a good overview of the background and context of the research project. Evaluation of key previous research quite evident throughout. Good range of literature examined throughout the presentation that is most relevant to the project’s background and context. Key studies contrasted but little evidence of evaluation. Points are supported with relevant literature, but the scope of the literature review is limited, as is background and context for the project. Some key studies not referred to at all or only inferred. The quality of the literature referred to is questionable or not relevant to the project’s background or context. Few key studies referred to.
Project Management Documentation (20%) Highly Robust, detailed and practical PM documentation with well thought off content reflecting outstanding understanding of project management practices. The PM documentation is nicely structured and detailed with excellent consideration of the project issues. The PM documentation is included with sufficient detail The PM documentation is broadly outlined, but details are not clear or accurate enough. The PM documentation is either not appropriate for the project or is poorly detailed with illogical content suggesting deficits in understanding of the scope and issues relating to next stage of research.
Presentation, structure and referencing (10%) The proposal is logical in its construction with no spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. It includes all necessary and applicable sections. In-text and reference list consistently adhere to a single Author-date system throughout. Completed checklist is very accurate. The proposal is mostly logical in its construction with 1 or 2 consistent spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to a single Author-date system with 1 or 2 errors. Completed checklist is accurate. The proposal is relatively easy to follow with 3 or 4 consistent spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to a single Author-date system with 3 or 4 errors. Completed checklist lacks accuracy. The proposal has all components, but is not logical in its construction or has a numerous inconsistent spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to a single Author-date system with 5 or 6 errors. Checklist is not included. Aspects of the proposal are missing or so poorly written due to numerous spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors so the meaning is unclear. In-text and reference list do not adhere to the same Author-date system or there are more than 7 errors. Checklist is not included.

Part 2D: Evaluation - Group Self and Peer Assessment

This part will be assessed based on the level of your engagement as a group member regarding your leadership, teamwork, attendance at group meetings, timely action, academic integrity, cooperation, quality of contribution, etc. The assessment criteria will also consider analytics data and the lecturer/tutor records of group ability to resolve conflicts and delegate tasks as well as the active engagement of each group member with online resources, tutorial activities, class participation. In particular, students must participate in all compulsory activities as specified in the unit schedule. Marks will be deducted from the overall calculated mark of this assessment as a penalty for lack of participation in the following compulsory activities:

WeekCompulsory Session or Activity(Penalty) Marks
Week 5Participating in group forming, negotiation and completion of group charter4
Week 10Participation in oral presentations3
Week 12Participation and completion of Endnote training activity

3


Referencing Style

Submission
Online

Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Apply project management processes, tools and techniques in articulating, designing and planning for the execution of a research project
  • Develop and employ ethical practices that consider social, cultural and legal responsibilities of researchers
  • Conduct a literature search to identify a problem that warrants research within the project management context
  • Select appropriate research approaches, methods and skills for solving the research problem
  • Prepare a research proposal with necessary components that describe an organised, coherent and convincing statement of the research intent, significance and strategies to conduct the research.


Graduate Attributes
  • Knowledge
  • Communication
  • Cognitive, technical and creative skills
  • Research
  • Self-management
  • Ethical and Professional Responsibility
  • Leadership

Academic Integrity Statement

As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.

Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.

When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.

Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.

As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.

What is a breach of academic integrity?

A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.

Why is academic integrity important?

A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.

Where can I get assistance?

For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.

What can you do to act with integrity?