CYP5073 Research Methods and Evidence-Based Practice Assessment2026 | LT
CYP 5073 Assessment Task
Research Presentation
A short introduction to the task
The research presentation will assess students’ understanding of the research methods introduced during semester one.
In this assignment, students will be required to:
- Determine their research area of interest
- Identify research that has previously explored this area. Students must identify at least THREE methods used in previous research (e.g., interviews, surveys, experiments, observations). These methods do NOT need to be in the same paper. In this sense, students will need to engage with and identify several research papers regarding their area of interest
- Discuss the research and their findings
- Reflect on the strengths and limitations of each method used to conduct this research
- Consider how you could use this method for your research
The data extraction tool that students complete throughout the module will support this assignment. The assignment will encourage students to engage with research in their area of interest and provide them with the knowledge base and research skills required for the semester two module and the dissertation at Level 6.
Key resources:
Core texts
- Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Christensen, P. and James, A. (Eds) (2008) Research with Children.
- Perspectives and Practices, London: Routledge.
- Flick, U. (2015). Introducing Research Methodology. London: Sage.
- Pajo, B. (2017). Introduction to Research Methods: A Hands-On Approach. London: Sage.
Recommended texts
- Fraser, S., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M. and Robinson, C. Eds. (2004) Doing Research with Children and Young People, London: Sage/OU.
- Gordon, L. (2019). Fundamental Research (2nd Eds). London: Sage.
- Schutt, R.K. (2018). Understanding the Social World: Research Methods for the 21st Century. London: Sage.
- Silverman, D. (2017). Doing Qualitative Research (5th Eds). London: Sage.
Guidance
Presentations should have 5-8 slides, contain references and a title page (including name, student number and title of presentation)
Please include
- Title page (Slide zero) The research presentation, the incidence of dementia in people aged 65 and over
- Introduction and definitions (Slide 1) This presentation will look at dementia. Dementia is a neurological condition that mainly affects the brain…
- Background (statistics, impact, risk factors and overall rationale of why this is a health and social care issue) (Slide 2)
- Outline your 1st study article (Study title, study design, methodology, study finding/results and discuss study limitations (Slide 3)
- Outline your 2nd study article (Study title, study design, methodology, study finding/results and discuss study limitations (Slide 4)
- Outline your 3rd study article (Study title, study design, methodology, study finding/results and discuss study limitations (Slide 5)
- Notes: that your studies should include at least THREE different methods (e.g., interviews, surveys, experiments, observations). These methods do NOT need to be on the same paper.
- Consider which method you could use for your research and why (Slide 6)
- PowerPoint slides should not be read in your presentation; they are supplementary.
- Prepare to have your presentation recorded.
- Prepare to be asked questions about your topic and research pathway. You must draw on your academic learning and research analysis on your chosen topic to do this.
Marking rubrics
|
Classification:
Criterion: |
Exceptiona l First 100, 95, 92 |
Outstandin g 1st/Dist 88, 85, 82 |
First/Distincti on 78, 75, 72 |
2 (i) 68. 65. 62 |
2 (ii) 58. 55. 52 |
Third 48. 45. 42 |
Fail 38. 35. 32 |
Abject Fail 25, 20, 10, 0 |
|
Knowledge & Understanding |
Polished grasp of subject. Astute and authoritativ e approach to complexity. |
Comprehen sive and confident grasp with a strong sense of subject complexity. |
Thorough understanding is evident and well applied to questions or projects. |
Secure, general understan ding and reasonabl e application to question or project. |
Sound knowledge relevant to the question or project. |
Limited knowledge shows basic understandi ng. Some awareness of the context of the question or project. |
Faulty understa nding of questions or concepts. Irrelevant or mostly absent content. |
No understanding of question or concepts. Irrelevant or absent content. |
|
Structure, Argument |
Effective and integrated over- arching argument or structure, clear, insightful synthesis. Highly creative understanding of topic. |
Effective overall argument with clear and insightful connections between claims. Creative understanding of topic. |
Clear and logical focus and direction with valuable connections made between claims. Good level of creativity. |
Well- focused on the question with some clear connectio ns made between claims and some overall direction. Some creativity. |
Addresses the topic with some direction and makes some connections between claims or different parts of artefact/assig nment. |
Argument is weak and difficult to detect. Connection s made between statements limited |
Lack of argument Faulty connectio n between statemen ts. |
No argument. Many faulty connections between statements. |
|
Analysis and Conclusions |
Original and searching analysis, critical appraisal of task and judicious conclusions . |
Searching analysis with pertinent conclusions drawn. |
Insightful analysis throughout with appropriate conclusions drawn. |
Strong analysis of salient illustrative examples. Some general conclusion s drawn. |
Some conclusions drawn based on some reasonable comparisons and examples. |
Basic analysis. Remains descriptive, little evaluation or comparison. Few clear conclusions |
Insufficie nt evaluatio n or attempt to make comparis ons. Conclusi ons illogical insufficient. |
No evaluation or attempt to make comparisons. Conclusions illogical or absent. |
|
Sources & Evidence
Adherence to Referencing Conventions, Technical Skills |
Extensive and evaluative use of evidential support for argument. Flawless referencing or technical skills. |
Extensive use of evidence with some evaluation. Flawless referencing or technical skills. |
Clear support of argument with well selected evidence. Excellent referencing or technical skills. |
Draws on relevant independe nt sources and evidence to support claims. Consistent and accurate referencin g or technical skills. |
Makes simple use of evidence from recommende d sources. Largely consistent accurate referencing. or technical skills. |
Relies on superficial statements with little supporting evidence. Limited referencing/ adherence to convention or technical skills. |
Lack of evidence or relevant sources. Inadequa te referenci ng or technical skills. |
No evidence or relevant sources. Inadequate or no referencing or technical skills. |
|
Written/Visual Oral Style & Clarity |
Professiona l and sophisticate d with exceptional clarity and coherence. Excellent, controlled, confident delivery, pace, and audience engagement. |
Professional and fluent with great clarity and coherence. Confident delivery, pace, and audience engagement |
Fluent and accurate with great clarity and coherence. Mostly confident delivery, pace, and audience engagement. |
Clear and coherent. Good delivery, pace, and audience engagement |
Some lapses of clarity. Some expression is ineffective. Satisfactory delivery, pace, and audience engagement |
Adequate, but awkward expression throughout with little clarity. Poor delivery, pace, and audience engagement |
Inadequa te and unclear presentation. Impaired communi cation. Error- strew |