This workbook is to be used in conjunction with the Module Guide and relates to the first assignment, which attracts 40% of the total mark. For your convenience the assessment criteria is included.
You are required to answer all 5 sections.
* NB Please be sure to use appropriate literature to support your work. Reference to the pertinent literature in required for each of the 5 sections and a reference list should be attached to your competed work.
Marking Criteria - Guidelines
Marking Criteria - Referencing
MARKING CRITERIA
Structure & clarity |
15 |
13-15 |
10-12 |
7-9 |
4-6 |
0-4 |
Structure & organisation
Presentation
Coherence |
|
Excellent organisation & structure
Presentation is of a high standard
Concise and well expressed |
Well structured logical organisation
Presentation is legible, grammatically correct
Coherent & well expressed |
Organisation & structure evident
Presentation is of an acceptable standard some presentational errors
Generally good but some lapses |
Inadequate attention to organisation & structure
Presentational mistakes and room for considerable improvement
Vague, poorly expressed |
Disorganised major lapses in organisation & structure
Presentation is poor
Incoherent |
|
|
|
||||
Application |
30 |
25-30 |
19-24 |
13-18 |
7-12 |
0-6 |
Applied to practice
Reflection |
|
Relevant research and theoretical issues are directly related to practice
Appropriate and well integrated personal reflection |
Relates theory and research to practice in a focused manner
Appropriate personal reflection |
A fair attempt to reconcile research findings and theory with practice
Reflection evident lacks depth |
Some difficulty in relating research findings and theoretical concepts to patient/client care
Very little reflection |
Little or no attempt to relate material to patient/care
No reflection |
Comments: |
|
|
||||
Evaluation |
30 |
25-30 |
19-24 |
13-18 |
7-12 |
0-6 |
Level of analysis
Synthesis |
|
Clear and focused arguments and demonstration of the ability to analysis and synthesise information |
Arguments are reasonably organised and demonstration of the ability to analyse and synthesise information |
Some valid arguments and evidence of analysis and some evidence of synthesis |
Some inconsistencies in arguments and some evidence of analysis and attempts at synthesis |
Arguments are poorly constructed and no evidence of analysis and synthesis |
Comments: |
|
|
||||
Level of investigation |
25 |
20-25 |
15-19 |
11-14 |
5-10 |
0-4 |
Relevant research cited
Evaluation of literature cited
Appropriate references system used |
|
Evidence of wide reading which is evaluated and integrand in a creative manner
Clear evaluation of literature cited
Reference citation and overall presentation standard is high |
Evidence of critical reading beyond course material
Evaluation evident
Citation, referencing are good |
Some evidence of reading and understanding beyond course material
Little evaluation Some minimal errors |
Reading limited to course material and demonstrates understanding
No evaluation
Poor or inconsistent use of referencing |
Little or no evidence of reading
Inadequate Major errors |
You are required to structure your work for submission as follows:
Front sheet to indicate name, student no., module, date and word count
Second page to declaration that it is students own work, an example of this is: