Assessment Guidelines:
Module title: Dissertation
Module code: LJMU- 7506-PSYSCI
Assessment Point: Summative assessment 1
Assessment task: Mini Systematic Review: 2000 words ± 10%
Submission deadline: Week 6 – Check also the information provided in the VLE. Submission procedure: Assignments should be submitted via the submission link on the VLE provided under Week 6.
General Guidance
Your assignment should be word-processed (handwritten assignments are not accepted), using Times new roman size 12 font, double spaced, with numbered pages and your student number printed as a footer on every page. The word limits stated for this assignment excludes the reference list at the end of the assignment but includes all text in the main body of the assignment (including direct quotations, in-text citations, tables)..
Please be aware that exceeding the word count limit will affect the academic judgement of the piece of work and may result in the award of a lower mark. Appendices are not considered a supplement, and thus, will not be assessed as part of the content of the assignment. As such, they will not contribute to the grade awarded; however, it may be appropriate to use an Appendices section for any material which is a useful reference for the reader. Please note that appendices are not included in the word count. The majority of references should come from primary sources (e.g., journal articles, conference papers, reports, etc.) although you can also utilise area-specific textbooks. You must ensure that you use the APA style of referencing which is the APA 7th Edition, please see here: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_style_introduction .html. Please indicate the word count length at the end of your assignment.
NO STUDENT WILL BE ALLOWED TO COLLECT ANY PRIMARY DATA
Marking and assessment
The first summative assessment requires the writing of a mini systematic review. The Mini Systematic-Review assignment submission will be graded out of 100% and will contribute to 20% of the overall module grade.
Assignment 1: Mini Systematic Review (20% weighting)
Conduct and write-up a mini systematic review of 2000 words (± 10%) on a research topic of your interest. The systematic review should be written in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.
The following sections should be included in your systematic review
• Title Page/Research Question This should include:
• Title – should reflect the topic of the systematic review
• Student’s details
o Student ID o Student’s Name
• Assignment details:
o Type (e.g. mini-systematic review) o Assignment Number (e.g. AP1) o Module Title o Word Count o Submission Date
• Tutor’s/Supervisor’s Name
• Introduction
• Background Information and evidence-based literature to the subject of your systematic review (e.g. context of the description of the problem/issue of research (e.g. medical, social, health), its importance in terms of disease burden and policy relevance)
• Rationale for the study
• Research Question(s)
• Research Aims/Objectives
• Methods
• Eligibility (Inclusion/Exclusion) Criteria o Use of PICOs (or other) framework to demonstrate the criteria
• Search Strategy o Databases (at least 2 databases should be used) used, grey literature, keywords/indexed/MeSH terms, Boolean operators
o Study Selection o Data Extraction
• Data Analysis (e.g. Narrative Synthesis)
• Results
• PRISMA flowchart
o Study Selection and Extraction Outcomes (i.e., number of studies selected/excluded in each step, reasons for exclusion, the remaining number of studies in each step and final number of studies included in the SR)
• ‘A summary of the findings’ table – Description of included studies.
o For example, if your systematic review is based on quantitative studies, you need to extract statistical information from the included studies (e.g. p-values, means, standard deviations, odds ratios, etc)
• Report the outcomes of the data synthesis. For example, a summary of the findings of the included studies in a way that covers research objectives and questions
• Discussion
• Summary of the main findings (try to avoid detailed repetition of results reporting)
• Interpretation of the main findings
• Critical analysis and evaluation of scientific evidence
• Limitations and Future Considerations (i.e., here you may summarize also the strengths of the review – before elaborating on the weaknesses/limitations)
*Note: Please note that Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment and quality of results are not essential for the purpose of this assignment.
Marking Criteria
Title of
Section
Criteria
Marks
Awarded
Cover Page
• Assignment topic and personal details
Understanding &
Depth of Knowledge
• Knowledge of the topic (e.g. research, concepts & theories)
• Use of scientific evidence to develop and support arguments
• Evidence from further reading
• Evidence of comprehension
/30
Analysis &
Synthesis
• Topic analysis, balanced and logical arguments
• Synthesis and analysis of information
• Coherent critical evaluation
• Argument flow
• Development of well-evaluated arguments (with support from research evidence)
• Original ideas and research interpretations
/40
Structure & Writing Organisation
• Inclusion of sections and components of the assignment
• Follows Assignment Brief (e.g. PRISMA checklist)
• Arguments and sections presented in a logical order
• Clarity and precision
/20
Presentation &
Referencing
• Correct use of grammar/syntax and spelling
• Typographical accuracy
• References coming from scientific sources (e.g. journal articles)
• APA formatting guidelines followed (e.g., citations, references, tables, figures, etc)
/10
LJMU Level 7 Grading Criteria
Please note that these level 7 descriptors apply to programmes validated for a 2016 – 17 start when level 7 modules will have a pass mark of 80% (including those that form part of UG Masters programmes).