PMP Undergrad Research Dissertation L6 Assignment Brief 2 - Dissertation 2023-24 (1)

docx

School

University of the Fraser Valley *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

TAXATION

Subject

English

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

8

Uploaded by BarristerMetalTrout28

Report
ONCAMPUS Assignment Brief Academic Year 2023-24 Please read this document carefully. It includes the learning outcomes, assignment task, information about plagiarism and marking criteria. Please speak to your tutor if you have any questions. Programme Pre-Master’s Programme Module Undergraduate Research Dissertation L6 Assessment title Research Dissertation Deadline date To be confirmed by your tutor Weighting This assessment counts for 80% of your overall grade for this module Pass mark 40% *please note your University may require a higher grade for progression. Assignment summary Following on from the development of your research proposal, making sure you have taken on board feedback and reflection, you are now required to execute your research dissertation as planned. As you work through the module content in your classes, you will need to apply the relevant areas to your own research focus independently as you go along, ensuring that you meet regularly with your tutor/supervisor for guidance, checking and challenging your process and content. You are expected to submit sections of your paper for discussion along the way as this is a critical part of your learning and development of the research process rather than just the outcome. Submission of work http://www.turnitinuk.com Feedback http://www.turnitinuk.com Feedback will also be communicated back to you via your tutor. They will confirm the timescale in which you will receive your feedback. Important details Please follow the below instructions: Word count 6,000 words File type Word processed Font 12 pitch font – Arial or Times New Roman Format Double spaced and justified Referencing Harvard system Notes Your assignment must include page numbers and word count. You will receive a 10% penalty for this assessment if you go over the word count by more than 10%. If your assignment is significantly under the
word count, you may not have answered the question in full. This will be reflected in your overall mark and feedback given by your tutor. The word count does not include contents, end of text references or appendices. Module learning outcomes: On successful completion of this assessment, you will have met the following module learning outcomes: Knowledge based outcomes: LO2. (part) Demonstrate a critical and analytical approach to reviewing relevant literature LO3. Critically evaluate the methods and value of research evidence in relation to validity and relevance to the specific area of study LO4. Detail evidence-based conclusions and recommendations through critical evaluation and analysis of material and data to inform practice Assessment criteria: In order to successfully complete this assessment and meet the above learning outcome, you must satisfy the following criteria: AC2.2 Critically analyse and evaluate the academic literature in relation to the area of research AC3.1 Conduct primary and/or secondary research data collection using appropriate methods to the research objectives AC3.2 Critically evaluate the research methodology undertaken for primary and secondary research, exploring sample selection, validity and ethical implications AC3.3 Evidence and interpret the outcomes of the research effectively, detailing results and statistical analysis as appropriate AC4.1 Critically appraise the primary and/or secondary research evidenced and its relevance to the research focus AC4.2 Develop conclusions from research findings in relation to hypothesis/es and research objectives AC4.3 Make suitable recommendations and determine next steps for further research Assignment instructions: For this assignment you will now implement your planned research proposal and complete a research dissertation within your chosen academic field. You will need to conduct primary research data collection alongside any relevant secondary research. Your research dissertation must cover the sections below with a word count of 6000 words. Title and Abstract (300 words) A summary of your research dissertation Section 1: Introduction (500 words) Page 2 of 8
The following points should be covered: The context of your research project and how it relates to your field of study The rationale and value of the project The research aim(s) / problem and objectives / questions your research aims to answer The hypothesis/es This section may be a refined and developed version from your research proposal and your final draft completed at the end of the research dissertation. Section 2: Literature Review (1700 words) Identify the theme or trend that your reading of the literature has identified Introduce the evidence – what do the studies say? Explore the evidence - how do they link together? Critically analyse and evaluate the literature – what is your interpretation? Are the claims valid and reliable? Are there any limitations in the studies? Can you challenge any points/findings? https://libguides.shu.ac.uk/literaturereviews Section 3: Methodology (1200 words) Research methodology – research paradigm, primary/secondary, qualitative/quantitative? Why did you choose the method(s)? Research design – the approach you have taken and the method used to collect data, e.g. questionnaires, interviews, focus groups etc Explain your approach to sample selection Critically evaluate your research methodology, design and approach, discuss and challenge any limitations in your methodology including validity, reliability, bias and/or ethics Section 4: Results and Findings (1800 words) Present your research findings – using statistical tests, figures, tables, diagrams for quantitative data Explain, evidence and interpret your qualitative findings Triangulate your research findings Ensure that you address your research questions/objectives Critically appraise your research findings – compare and contrast with existing literature; are there limitations, errors, further questions resulting from your findings? Develop your theory and evaluate its relevance to the area of study Section 5: Conclusion and Recommendations (500 words) Develop conclusions from your research in relation to your research focus and what you have discovered linked to your literature review and hypothesis/es Make suitable recommendations and consider your next steps for further development Bibliography Using Harvard Referencing (or alternative as directed by your centre) Appendices Include any relevant appendices At stages throughout the process, you will be asked for draft submissions and expected to discuss these with your tutor/supervisor. Failure to do this could result in a dissertation that does not evidence the necessary learning and development for progression to a master’s degree. Page 3 of 8
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
*word count for each section is a guide only Academic Offences We expect all submitted work to be your own words (apart from in-text quotations), written in a style that reflects your English language level. The following are all academic offences and will result in a penalty being applied: Plagiarism - copying other people’s work and presenting it as your own; Contract cheating - when a third party (e.g. essay-writing service) receives payment to produce work on your behalf; Using AI Tools e.g. ChatGPT to produce your work, unless included as part of the assignment task; Collusion - when a piece of work is produced with the assistance of another person/s; Translation - where work has been directly translated from your first language, using an online translator or translation app. The full details of our Academic Offences Policy can be found in the Programme Handbook on Moodle. You must complete the Coursework Submission Declaration to declare that all work submitted is your own. This must be uploaded to Turnitin before the first summative piece of work and covers all work submitted during your programme of study. Your Centre will provide you with a copy of the Declaration and instructions on when this should be submitted. If you have not submitted your Declaration, each assignment may be rejected and may result in a mark of 0 being awarded. Page 4 of 8
Marking criteria - Research Dissertation Incomplete/Unsatisfactor y Competent Strong Exceptional Total Marks Mark as % Weighted % 0-3 marks 4-5 marks 6-8 marks 9-10 marks /10 % x weighting Abstract 5% Poor abstract which may just identify each step rather than a summary of the focus, methods and findings Unable to determine the use or relevance of the paper A reasonable attempt to provide a succinct description of the purpose of the research paper, identifying main key points and any implications A well written abstract that captures the essence of the study and provides the reader with an overall sense of the purpose and findings of the paper An excellent abstract that draws the reader in and encapsulates what has transpired in the study Provides enough information to determine the use of the paper for citation and further reading Multiplied by 0.05 Introduction 5% A poor/unclear attempt to identify a reasonable research problem/question Context is not relevant to an appropriate field of study Research objectives are not clear or linked to the research focus The context of the research focus is clear with some rationale as to the purpose and value of the project There are clearly defined aims and objectives, linking to a hypothesis(es) The research focus may still be too ambitious or vague as to the relevance for the student, however, there is a feasible research idea and question to follow The clarity and purpose of the research focus is very clear and defined with specific objectives which should address the research question(s) suitably A well thought out and reasoned hypothesis(es) is given and the overall introduction is coherent and purposeful The context of the research focus is valuable and has clearly been thought about carefully The objectives provided show direct correlation with the research question(s) and the reader is able to see direct links as to how these objectives would contribute to the required outcome and link to the reasoned hypothesis(es) At this level there will be minimum scope for improvement Multiplied by 0.05 Literature Review 20% AC2.2 Very limited evidence of independent reading and/or inappropriate sources Engagement with the literature is very superficial or presented in a descriptive way with no application or appraisal Provides some evidence to support the central position with minimal research sources (min. 5) Some sources may not be relevant, accurate, and reliable and/or appropriately referenced and cited in the paper, yet there has been an attempt to source literature with relation to the Provides evidence of a broader reading from appropriate sources There is a good attempt to apply the literature and evidence of developing ability to appraise material critically through challenging and questioning validity and Evidence of a broad and/or in depth independent reading from appropriate sources Choice of sources clearly enhances fulfilment of the research objectives Accurate and systematic application of material with well-developed critical appraisal Multiplied by 0.2
research focus and explore links to the research focus Some evidence of analysis and evaluation though this may be limited and require further development limitations Key theories are applied correctly within the context of the research focus Methodology 15% AC3.1, AC3.2 Choice of methodology and relationship to information and/or data being collected is not clear or relevant Sample selection has very little relevance or impact on the research focus No attempt made to critique the research methodology undertaken An appropriate method of primary research data collection has been used and secondary research is relevant Some justification for the research methodology approach is provided although there may be limitations in the selection and link to the research objectives Some consideration has been made with regards to sampling, validity and ethical implications An attempt has been made to critically analyse the research methodology undertaken The process and selection of methodology is effective and appropriate to the aims and objectives of the research project and a good rationale for its selection is provided Sampling has been carefully considered and there is understanding of various implications in relation to this A good attempt made to critically analyse the research methodology undertaken and how it impacts on the findings A convincing, self-determined choice of methodology which enables the successful collection and recording of information and/or data Sample is justified and there is clear evidence as to the validity of the sample selection The reader is able to understand the impact of the methodology chosen on the findings through a strong critical evaluation Multiplied by 0.15 Results and Findings 25% AC3.3, AC4.1 Information and/or data is poorly organised/displayed and is not analysed to extract understanding from the research findings Clear presentation of research findings with a reasonable attempt at detailing results and summarising any qualitative or quantitative findings Some evidence of triangulation Attempts to address research questions/objectives and link to existing literature, though this may be limited/tenuous Demonstrates general understanding with limited analysis of the research topic and thesis (argument) Summarises perspectives, counter-arguments, or opposing positions Research findings are presented and organised using clear structures/processes to answer research questions/objectives Triangulation attempted to extract new information Makes good use of a range of relevant analytical techniques and shows developed ability to compare alternative theories and approaches where relevant Demonstrates a command of relevant analytical techniques and the ability to apply these to new and/or abstract information and situations Information and/or data is synthesised / triangulated to construct emergent ideas which seek to answer the research focus Displays a good understanding of the limits or appropriate uses of the analytical approaches Multiplied by 0.25 Page 6 of 8
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Conclusion and Recommenda tions 15% AC4.2, AC4.3 Limited or ineffective attempt to draw together conclusions from the process and project Conclusion may simply repeat sections of the project or contain unsubstantiated and/or invalid points A simple/general conclusion that summarises the research findings and draws key points or assumptions from these There is an attempt to align with literature and hypothesis(es), although this may have lost some focus along the way Consideration had been made with regards to recommendations, however these may be generic and/or basic A good conclusion showing development and insight to the process and project overall There is a good link to the literature, evidence and theory, forming an integrated part of overall argument and/or discussion Reasonable recommendations made Conclusion is considerably well developed and shows originality Forms an integrated part of the overall argument and/or discussion, reflecting a grasp of theory/evidence/literature to a relevant conceptualisation Clearly though out recommendations are provided which are valuable and provide clear development for future study Multiplied by 0.15 Academic writing and referencing 15% Ranging from a very poor to an overly simplistic/inappropriate academic style with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader. No or limited use of sources to support a point. No or minimal attempt to use Harvard referencing Competently written, with only minor lapses from standard grammar/spelling, which do not impede the overall meaning. An appropriate format is used and academic style is emerging. Reasonable use of sources to support points. Uses Harvard referencing throughout, though may be some formatting errors. Well written, with standard spelling and grammar in a readable style with acceptable format. Consistent use of academic style. Some minor non-impeding language errors. Appropriate range of sources, well organised and uses Harvard referencing with only minor formatting errors. Excellently written, with minimal errors in spelling and grammar. Academic style is applied skilfully and appropriately. Excellent range of sources, with clear links between all sections and logical to the reader. Uses Harvard referencing with no/isolated errors. Multiplied by 0.15 TOTAL - Sum of weighted % Example: Page 7 of 8
Page 8 of 8