2. Assessment task 2
Assessment Title Assessment 2: Research Proposal
Task Description Using the research question developed during assessment 1 develop a logical and congruent research proposal to answer this question. Present the proposal and the justification discussion under the following headings:
1. Introduction / Background
2. Problem statement & Research question / Hypotheses
3. Research design
4. Participants i.e. recruitment, sampling etc.
5. Data collection
6. Data analysis
7. Rigour OR Reliability / Validity
8. Ethical issues - also discuss in-text and attach the UOW formatted participant information sheet and consent form as an appendix
9. Limitations
10. Conclusion
Consider carefully the research approach based on the framing of the question (i.e. congruence between question, philosophy, research design and the elements of the proposal). You must show evidence of understanding the research process, research methodology and design considerations.
Essay writing principles apply. Headings should be used. Please use critical discussion, not bullet points or lists.
Support all statements by referring to appropriate contemporary research based literature. You must use a broad range of literature to support all elements of the research proposal providing a critique of the literature to support assertions. It is strongly suggested that multiple research texts or papers about research methods are used to underpin your work.
The first page of the assessment should be the coversheet that incudes your student details and a word count for the assignment and title.
You are required to submit your draft assessment via the Turnitin drop box on the subject Moodle site before submission of the assessment for marking. Submission of the draft assessment to Turnitin supports your learning through the provision of a report about your assessment; modify your assessment before final drop box submission.

Word limit 2500
Return Date to Students Following declaration of results to students
Weighting 50%
Assessment Criteria See Marking Rubric following.
Referencing Style Author – Date (Harvard)
A summary of the Harvard system can be accessed in the online guide on the Library website at: http://public01.library.uow.edu.au/refcite/style-guides/html/
Submission Online in Moodle Dropbox as per instructions in Subject Outline
Subject Learning Outcomes Assessed 2. formulate a researchable question;
3. identify and address ethical issues relevant to research;
6. plan data collection that will provide answers to a research question, are
congruent with the methodology chosen, and will collect appropriate data.


SNPG915 Essential Skills for Health Researchers
Marking Rubric: Assessment 2: Research Proposal
Student ID_____________ Marker________________
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Background / Literature Review
(8 marks)
Little evidence of understanding the purpose or structure of a literature review. May contain serious errors of fact.
The range of literature sources used is insufficient. Insufficient evidence of critical review or synthesis of essential issues.
Little attempt to link issues raised in the review of literature to the proposed research. Little evidence of critical thinking. Over-reliance on description of research reports rather than analysis & critique.
The text does not fully reveal what is known about the topic, nor identify clearly the gaps in knowledge that support the need for the proposed study. Provides an overview of some relevant literature. Includes mostly primary sources.
The text identifies what is known about the topic, the existing gaps in knowledge & supports the need for the proposed study. Provides a thorough review of relevant literature that informs the proposed research. Critical evaluation may be inconsistent in parts. Includes mostly primary sources. The text follows a logical sequence & reveals what is known about the topic. May not be clear in what ways the proposed research can enhance knowledge. Provides a critical review of relevant literature that informs the proposed research (including methodological critique). Includes mostly primary sources. The text follows a logical sequence & reveals what is known about the topic & in what ways the proposed research can enhance knowledge.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Problem statement & research question
(6 marks) The problem statement lacks adequate detail. The research question is incomplete or does not match the problem statement. The problem statement is expressed but lacks adequate detail.
The research question is included but poorly expressed. The problem statement & research question are expressed but incomplete due to minor omissions. The problem statement is clearly expressed. The research questions are correctly stated. The problem statement is clearly expressed. The research questions are concisely & correctly stated.
= 2 3 4 5 6
Methodology
(4 marks) The chosen methodology is unclear, or not related to the research question or hypotheses. Some essential elements & limitations of the chosen methodology may be identified but not explored. The chosen methodology is appropriate & explored, but the argument for the choice may be inconsistently substantiated. Several relevant concepts & principles are discussed & related to the research focus. The chosen methodology is appropriate & the choice is justified, though there may be some omissions from the argument. Most relevant concepts & principles are discussed & related to the research focus. The chosen methodology is appropriate & the choice is justified by a sound argument. Most relevant concepts & principles are discussed & related to the research focus. The chosen methodology is appropriate, & the choice is justified by a sound argument. The essential elements of the methodology are discussed in full & related to the research focus.
0 1 2 3 4
Research Design
(8 marks) The design may be identified but not described in adequate detail. It may not match or will not enable all of the research questions or aims to be appropriately addressed. The design is identified but lacks significant detail in parts. The research design, though not fully described, does relate to the research question(s) & aims. The design is identified but may not be fully described or does not clearly address all of the research aims or questions. The design is correctly identified & described & will address the research aims/questions of the proposed study. The design is clearly identified & fully described. The relationship between the chosen design & the research aims/ questions of the proposed study is skilfully & logically argued.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Population and sampling plan
(8 marks) The population & sampling plan are identified & but not fully described. The eligibility criteria are unrealistic, incorrect and/or not explained. The sampling plan lacks essential detail, or is unrealistic or unethical. The population & sampling plan are identified & but not fully described. The eligibility criteria are identified & in the main explained. The sampling plan may lack significant detail or be unrealistic. The population & sampling plan are identified & described. The eligibility criteria are identified & in the main explained. The sampling plan may lack significant detail. The population & sampling plan are identified & described. The eligibility criteria are identified & in the main explained. The sampling plan is appropriate. The target & accessible population are clearly identified & described. The eligibility criteria are identified & fully explained. The sampling strategy is appropriate & addresses the issue of sampling bias.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Recruitment and retention
(8 marks) The strategies for recruitment are identified in part only, or are inappropriate or would result in a breach of human rights. While the strategies for recruitment are described & ethically appropriate, a lack of detail is provided. The strategies for recruitment are described & ethically appropriate. Some retention issues are addressed. The strategies for recruitment are described & ethically appropriate. Retention issues are addressed. The strategies for recruitment are comprehensively described & ethically appropriate. Retention issues are discussed realistically & cogently.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Data collection instruments
(8 marks) The data collection instruments are neither adequately justified nor explained. They may be unrelated to the chosen design and/or research questions & aims. The data collection instruments are congruent with the chosen design & research questions & are in the main explained. The data collection instruments are congruent with the chosen design & research questions & are explained. The data collection instruments are congruent with the chosen design & research questions & are fully explained. The data collection instruments are congruent with the chosen design & research questions & fully & fluently explained & justified.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Data collection procedures
(8 marks) Data collection procedures are either not outlined or are theoretically inappropriate. Issues that might undermine the collection of unbiased high quality data are neither identified nor explained. Data collection procedures are outlined & are theoretically appropriate. Issues that might undermine the collection of unbiased high quality data may not be fully identified or explained. Data collection procedures are outlined & are theoretically appropriate. Issues that might undermine the collection of high quality data are identified but may not be fully explained. Data collection procedures are outlined & are theoretically appropriate. Most Issues that might undermine the collection of unbiased high quality data are addressed. Data collection procedures summarized & are theoretically appropriate. Any issues that may undermine the collection of unbiased high quality data are fully addressed.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Data Analysis
(8 marks) Data analysis options either inappropriate or not identified or not described. Appropriate options for an analysis of the collected data are correctly identified but lack a full description. Appropriate options for an analysis of the collected data are correctly identified & in the main described. Appropriate options for an analysis of the collected data are correctly identified & described. Appropriate options for an analysis of the collected data are comprehensively & correctly described.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Validity and Reliability/Rigour (8 marks) Possible threats to validity, reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are not accurately identified. Strategies to overcome threats to validity & reliability or rigor & trustworthiness may not be appropriate or identified. The majority of possible threats to validity, reliability or rigor & trust-worthiness are accurately identified. Strategies to overcome threats to validity & reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are, in the main, identified & appropriate. Possible threats to validity, reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are accurately identified. Strategies to overcome threats to validity & reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are appropriate & identified. Possible threats to validity, reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are identified & discussed. Strategies to overcome threats to validity & reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are appropriate & explained. Possible threats to validity, reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are accurately identified & fully discussed. Strategies to overcome threats to validity & reliability or rigor & trustworthiness are appropriate & fully explained.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Ethical Considerations (8 marks) Not all ethical issues are identified or there are significant gaps in the exploration of the relationship between ethical principles & the conduct of the study. Copies of the information sheet & consent forms are may be missing or incomplete or the content may not adhere to the principles of ethical research. Ethical issues that may arise in the conduct of the study are identified & reflect the principles of ethical research. There are some gaps or confusion in the exploration. Copies of the information sheet & consent forms are attached. These forms may have minor errors. Ethical issues that may arise in the conduct of this proposed study are identified & reflect the principles of ethical research. Tends to be more descriptive than exploratory. Copies of the information sheet & consent forms are attached & appropriate & adhere to the principles of ethical research. Ethical issues that may arise in the conduct of this proposed study are described & reflect the principles of ethical research. Copies of the study information sheet & consent forms are attached & appropriate & adhere to the principles of ethical research. Ethical issues that may arise in the conduct of this proposed study are comprehensively & fluently explored & reflect the principles of ethical research. Copies of the study information sheet & consent forms are attached & appropriate & adhere to the principles of ethical research.
0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8
Limitations
(6 marks) Limitations to the study are not accurately or sufficiently identified. Few relevant limitations identified with minimal discussion. Some potential limitations are identified but may be incomplete or with limited discussion. Several limitations are identified with some discussion. A range of limitations are identified and fully discussed.
0 1 2-3 4-5 6
Referencing
(4 marks) Unsatisfactorily acknowledges sources and/or fails to support assertions from the literature. Inaccurate referencing as per Harvard Style. Paper may not be submitted via Turnitin. Satisfactorily acknowledges sources, supports assertions from the literature and cites in-text appropriately. Acceptable referencing as per Harvard Style. Paper submitted via Turnitin. Comprehensively acknowledges sources, supports assertions from the literature and cites appropriately as per Harvard Style. Paper submitted via Turnitin. Rigorously acknowledges sources and supports assertions from the literature. Precise, referencing as per Harvard Style. Paper submitted via Turnitin.
0 1 2 3 4
Organisation, Style And Language
(4 marks) No evidence of informed discussion or critical review of literature. Major elements of the proposal not addressed and arguments supporting the proposed study are absent or illogical. The range of literature sources used is insufficient. Over reliance on secondary sources. Little evidence of critical thinking or analysis and an over reliance on description and/or unsubstantiated generalizations.
Over reliance on a limited number of sources
Meaning is apparent but language may be clumsy. A wide range of correctly referenced authoritative and relevant sources have been used to support the need for the proposed study. Writing style is articulate, vocabulary and grammar enhance argument flow. Evidence of critical discussion, linkage and integration of information. Assignment is easy to read, logical flow evident. Objective and authentic writing style. Technical terms explained where necessary. Key concepts supported by reference to the research literature.
0 1 2 3 4
Presentation
(4 marks)
Frequent errors in spelling, grammar and/or writing style detract from reading. May exceed the word limit. Grammar and spelling contain multiple errors. The formatting and layout of document are poor. May exceed the word limit. Grammar and spelling contain some minor errors. Good formatting and layout of document. Adheres to word limit. Syntax, grammar, punctuation and spelling are correct. Excellent formatting and layout of document. Adheres to word limit.
0 1 2 3 4
Comments:
Total Marks: / 100
Marker Signature: Date: /2016