*This document is for CU Group students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this module and should not be passed to third parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of this rule should be reported to [email protected]
|Module Title: Research skills for graduate study|
|Module Code: 60041MP|
|Study Mode: FT
|Students will be responsible for choosing a project that should include in-depth technical analysis, problem-solving and innovation. Successful completion of the project will require critical understanding of research methods, effective planning, self-management, record keeping, and strong communication.
This task allows students to evaluate the progress of their project. Students are required to build their Portfolio (OneNote/ Evernote etc.) of the intended work and development of chosen project.
The Portfolio (1500 words) should include:
Completed CU ethics form for the proposed research (Ensure the topic is agreed with the tutor. Use provided template. (70 Marks)
A Risk Assessment of the potential emerging problems including an analysis of what standards and legislation along with political and social aspects the project will need to uphold. Use provided template. (20 Marks)
Gantt chart highlighting the project development, the main tasks that will be undertaken and the timeline. (10 Marks)
|Completion of this assessment will address the following learning outcomes:|
|1||Demonstrate a critical understanding of the main philosophical and theoretical approaches to research methods.|
|2||Critically evaluate the key ethical, political, legal and social issues that need to be considered when carrying out research|
There should be a title page which clearly identifies the following:
* Name and code of the module
* Student number
* Title of the Assessment
* Assessment number
* Word count
The word count identified includes quotations and citations. However, it does exclude the list of references and/or the bibliography and, unless specifically stated, encompasses a discrepancy of + or – 10%.
If you are not able to complete your coursework on time due to extenuating circumstances*, the ONLY way to receive an extension (up to 5 working days) or a deferral (anything longer than 5 working days) is to contact [email protected]
Extenuating circumstances are defined by CU as ‘genuine circumstances beyond your control or ability to foresee, and which seriously impair your assessed work’. Please note that you will need to provide third party evidence to support your reasoning for requiring an extension or deferral. Your course tutor is NOT able to approve an extension or a deferral. If you have not completed the official forms and had your request approved, your work will count as not submitted and receive a zero mark.
Guidance Notes and Considerations
From September 2020, Coventry University Group started the move from the Coventry University Guide to Referencing in Harvard Style to the APA 7th edition style of referencing.
You can choose whether you want to continue to use the Coventry University Guide to Referencing in Harvard Style, or switch to APA 7th edition.
Although you can choose to make the switch to APA at any time, you must use a single consistent style of referencing within each assessment.
Referencing guidance can be accessed on the Library’s LibGuides pages.
Use of Sources and Information:
Academic Writing Resources
There are a variety of academic writing resources available which can be accessed via LibGuides. These writing guides can help with different types of assessment as well as important writing skills needed for university.
Glossary of Assessment Terms for Assessment Writing – this is an a-z that covers the majority of terms used in assessment briefs, learning outcomes and feedback throughout the CU Group. If you would like any further support with your assessment, you can contact your Academic Writing Developer or visit the Academic Writing LibGuides page.
If you would like to book an Academic Writing appointment for support with your assessment, you can contact your Writing Developers:
CUC: [email protected]
CUS: [email protected]
CUL Dagenham: [email protected]
CUL Greenwich: [email protected]
Academic Integrity Guidance
The best way to avoid academic misconduct is to follow appropriate academic and referencing conventions. Further guidance on academic integrity and conduct can be found using LibGuides.
Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the Academic Conduct Panel. This applies to all coursework and exam answers. If you would like more guidance on understanding collusion, you can find it on LibGuides.
If an assessment suspected of involving a breach of academic integrity is found to display a marked difference in writing style, knowledge and skill level from that demonstrated elsewhere on the course, you may be required to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assessment is entirely your own work.
Proofreading of assessments by CU approved proofreaders is permitted. There is a list of approved proof readers along with guidelines for use. However, please remember that proofreading is a lengthy and detailed process for which there is a cost. If you decide to use a proofreader, please take this into account and contact them at least 10 days in advance of your assessment deadline.
You must not submit work for an assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full), either for your current course or for another qualification of this university, unless this is specifically provided for in your assessment brief or specific course or module information.
It is important to realise that as a student you should not submit all or part of an assessment for which you have already received academic credit, to be used for an assessment in a different module. Reusing your own work in this way is called self-plagiarism. Where you wish to refer to some of your own work you must reference it in the same way that you reference work by other people.
|An exceptional level of ability along with an outstanding performance; detailed critical analysis.||An exceptional level of ability along with an outstanding performance; detailed critical analysis.||An exceptional level of ability; no weaknesses; a more mature performance than normally expected; detailed critical analysis.||A high level of ability; no major weaknesses; clear understanding of subject matter; professional standard.||A good level of ability overall; weaknesses in some areas offset by strengths in other aspects.||A minimum standard of achievement; competence in some aspects, below standard in others.||Most aspects below standard; serious shortcomings in coverage, content and approach.|