msc cbt project handbook 2016 - … of... · web viewresearch methods in clinical psychology: an...

MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Portfolio/Dissertation Handbook for Masters Programmes in the School of Health Sciences

Subjects of:Developing and applying the skills of research as it

applies to practice to a specialised area of CBT.

Research Portfolio HANDBOOK

2016

Last updated October 2016 1

List of Contents – Research Portfolio Handbook for MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Research Portfolio Handbook Page

1. Introduction 3

2. The Masters Research Portfolio 3

3. Aims of Research Portfolio 4

4. 4.1 Choice of your Research Portfolio Topic 54.2 Types of Research Portfolio 5

5. Approval of your Research Topic and Outline Proposal5.1 synopsis5.2 Research Proposal5.3 Literature Review5.4 Research project paper5.5 agreement of authorship5.6 approval to proceed

6

6

6

8

9

6. The supervised portfolio period 9

7. Roles and responsibilities 10

8. The Presentation of the Research Portfolio 12

9. Plagiarism 12

10. Assessment 1310.1 Assessment Criteria 1410.2 QMU Attributes of Performance 17

11. Module Descriptor 21

Appendices 1. Synopsis 24

2. Research Proposal Guidelines 25

3. Literature Review Guidelines 26

4. Research project Guidelines 27

5. Agreement of Authorship 28

6. Time-plan for Part-time students 30

7. Portfolio Feedback 31


Research Portfolio HANDBOOK

1. Introduction

This handbook will explain what you need to do to fulfil the requirements for the Masters Research Portfolio to be eligible for an award of an MSc in each of the subject areas within the School of Health Sciences. Please note that different minor regulations may apply in some instances, but all operate within the Queen Margaret University-wide regulations.

The handbook is constructed so that school-wide considerations are presented first in each section, followed by subject specific aspects.

The School wide section is pertinent to all students studying at Masters level within the School of Health and gives general guidance, where the subject specific area will give more detailed information relevant your programme requirements. Please read both sections carefully.

The guidance in this handbook should be read alongside the regulations contained in the Taught Postgraduate Framework website

QMU Taught Postgraduate Regulations:

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/Taught_Postgraduate_Framework.pdf

www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/pg_graduate_attributes.doc

QMU Governance regulations:

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/QUALITY/gr/default.htm

2. The Masters Portfolio

The Masters Research Portfolio (herein called Portfolio), once entitled the dissertation, is the pinnacle of achievement in a taught Masters degree. The portfolio encompasses all of the elements of the modules including its planning and execution. The portfolio refers to the combination of three papers (13,000 word total) which investigate a topic within the chosen specialist area of CBT.

The components of the Masters Portfolio include:

a. A Research Proposal (2000 words): This would detail the title and rationale of the chosen research project, and then appraise the relevant research


http://www.qmu.ac.uk/QUALITY/gr/default.htm

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/pg_graduate_attributes.doc

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/Taught_Postgraduate_Framework.pdf

methodologies, epistemology and comprehensive consideration of ethical issues. Weighting 20%

b. A Literature Review (6000 words): This would be a comprehensive literature review focusing on a topic related to a specific aspect of the research proposal which critically appraises and synthesises the evidence pertaining to a specific area explored in the proposal. Weighting 40%

c. Research Project Paper (5000 words): The project component will involve an exploratory piece of research which would include designing and undertaking a research project including: choosing appropriate research questions, epistemology, methodology, collecting data, analysing data and drawing appropriate conclusions from your study. Due consideration should be given to ethical requirements of the study and appropriate Research and Development procedures should be observed. The project could be in the form of a small scale, service related audit, service based evaluation, a single N or case series design. A range of research approaches or project methodology may be adopted, drawing for example from phenomenological, case study, implementation science or action research paradigms and using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods of data collection and analysis. The submitted paper should be suitable for publication and written in journal article format. The student should identify an appropriate journal in which they wish to publish and follow appropriate style. The paper would summarise the above literature review along with any other relevant literature, detail the actual project undertaken and present ready to be submitted for publication, with some discussion of a potential route of dissemination such as work based report, publication, poster, etc. Weighting 40%

It is equivalent to four taught modules or 600 hours of student effort, the majority of which will be self directed learning. The Masters Portfolio must show sufficient evidence of independent thought to justify an award of a Masters degree. It will build on the research skills that you gained in the taught module(s). You will present the results of a research study that you have undertaken yourself, in a topic appropriate to your profession or the knowledge base upon which the profession rests, in the form outlined by the specific subject area.

The assessment will look for evidence that you can choose new or fresh ways to look at a topic or issue which could lead to professional innovation. You will need to demonstrate that you know how to develop a sound research proposal; that you can develop a protocol to show that you can manage the research process. Finally, that you can complete analyses and interpretation of research in relation to appropriate knowledge bases within a prescribed period of time and prescribed resources

3. Aims of the Research Portfolio

The general aims are to:

a) enable students to develop and apply the skills of research and enquiry to produce original work which contributes to a subject, field or profession,

b) engage students in study which demands a professional approach, academic rigour, independence and self-direction.

The learning outcomes of the research portfolio are to enable the student to:Last updated October 2016 4

a) Explore and apply relevant research approaches and clinical skills, to the chosen topic.

b) Critically evaluate the existing literature appropriate to the chosen research topic.

c) Develop critically, strategically and in depth a topic or area of interest within the chosen project type.

d) Critically appraise the ethical implications of the proposal, focusing on an examination of the roles and responsibilities of a (neophyte) researcher.

e) Develop further skills of practice and inquiry, demonstrating an ability to set the portfolio in its wider context, to sustain argument and to present conclusions.

f) Present and be able to defend the rationale, approach or methodology, outcomes and conclusions of their portfolio.

4. Choice of your Research Portfolio Topic

Portfolio topics should be intellectually demanding and of particular interest to you. The subject specific section is presented next, so that you can see the subject area requirements for portfolio selection, supervision and co-ordination.

Subject Specific

4.1 Choice of Research Portfolio Topic

The topic must focus on a novel area of research in the field of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy in theory or practice.

For CBT course staff to support you, it should be an area which reflects our expertise, in either content or methods. You are therefore encouraged to consider staff research interests when choosing your topic.

These could include psychosis, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, eating disorders, older adults, physical health problems, CBT Supervision, developments in CBT training, practice and dissemination or the student’s specialist interest as approved by course team.

Any area of CBT interest will be considered dependent on availability of supervision.

It is also important to choose a topic which interests you, is intellectually demanding, and is one which you can live with and enjoy over many months. The topic may come from a work-related issue or problem, or it may emerge from discussion with your employer, academic tutor or research portfolio co-ordinator.

4.2 Type of Research Portfolio

The portfolio will involve an exploratory piece of research which would include designing and undertaking a research project including choosing appropriate research questions, epistemology, methodology, collecting data, analysing data and drawing appropriate conclusions from your study. The project could be in the form of a service related audit; service based evaluation, a single N or case series design. A range of research approaches or project methodology may be adopted, drawing for example from phenomenological, case study, implementation science or action


research paradigms and using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods of data collection and analysis.

5. Approval of your Research Topic and Outline Proposal

Your topic has to be approved by the Programme Committee, so that you can be allocated a portfolio supervisor. Once the Programme Committee has approved the topic, you will be able to develop a full proposal with advice from your supervisor in the format for your subject area. You will be given a deadline for the submission of the proposal by your supervisor.

If you fail to submit a satisfactory protocol, you may be asked to revise the protocol or prepare a new proposal and protocol.

5.1 A brief synopsis - all students (formative)

You should write a brief synopsis of your intended work (Appendix 1), giving your portfolio title, clearly stated objectives for the project (state the research question or hypothesis), and a short outline of how the objectives will be met (research methodology). State briefly also your reason for choosing the topic and ideas for the literature review. The synopsis should be not more than 750 words and should include a few of the key sources consulted in developing your ideas for the work. The synopsis may be prepared in discussion with academic staff; it should not be regarded as a fixed model but rather as a well considered starting point from which the full research portfolio will evolve.

Submit your synopsis to the Portfolio Co-ordinator by the agreed date. The synopses will then be discussed by the Postgraduate Programme Committee, which will appoint an appropriate academic supervisor. You will be informed in writing about the name of, and ways of contacting, your supervisor and you should make an appointment to see your supervisor as soon as possible. Your supervisor will have experience of planning and undertaking research. Additionally, you should identify a colleague or employer to act as a local supervisor. Local supervisors should also have a clear understanding of the demands of a Masters level degree. The overall aim in selecting a supervision team is to ensure that research portfolio topics are explored in the context of both research design and contemporary professional practice.

The guidelines are now presented for research proposal [5.2], literature review [5.3], and research project [5.4].

5.2 Research Proposal

5.2.1 Feasibility The study must be feasible in terms of the time and the resources available to you. We know from some students’ experiences, for example, that there can be tensions between an employer’s needs for information and a student’s project goals and available time. You may perhaps already be involved in a project of some kind at work and the research portfolio may seem to provide an ideal opportunity to further develop and evaluate the work. However, sometimes the scale of such work is too great for the portfolio and, following


discussion with your academic supervisor, you may need to negotiate with your employer to select one issue or one part of a larger piece of work as the focus for your portfolio. Alternatively, it may be wise to select a completely different topic. If you are concerned that you seem to be under pressure from your employer to take on a large portfolio project or if you are at all unsure about the feasibility of a project, please talk it over with your academic supervisor. In our experience, negotiation and refocusing are always acceptable where they are in the best interests of successful completion of your portfolio and degree.

5.2.2 Outline proposalAll students should prepare, in discussion with their academic supervisor, a full proposal for their study (Appendix 2). This part of the exercise not only provides valuable experience in the research planning process, but is also a necessary step in relation to ethical approval. Applications for ethical approval must be accompanied by an outline proposal. At this stage, access arrangements to patients/clients and likely resource requirements should be discussed and set out; for example, costs associated with secretarial support, computing/statistical support, library, photocopying, postage, stationery, travel and other equipment etc. The length of this work is 2000 words.

A copy of the full proposal, research ethics release form (where appropriate) and agreement of authorship (Appendix 5) should be lodged with the Portfolio Co-ordinator within 4 months of the commencement of the MSc modules. This full proposal represents an important part of your work and is included within your final portfolio with a weighting of 20% of the overall mark.

5.2.3 Ethical approval and access

The Head of the subject area of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy is responsible for ensuring that Queen Margaret University Research Ethics Guidelines are being followed in all research associated with the School. Full guidelines are given on the QMU website:

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/Rs/

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/research_knowledge/ethics-governance.aspx

All proposals must be accompanied by the University Research Ethics release form.

You can fill in online, but it must be printed out, and signed by yourself, supervisor, and subject head.

Subsequent to this, all empirical studies must be submitted to an Ethics Committee, whether internal to QMU or external.

If applying to undertake research in the NHS, the following sites can be accessed:

https://www.myresearchportfolio.org.uk/Help/Information.aspx

http://www.nhsresearchscotland.org.uk/services/research-ethicsLast updated October 2016 7

http://www.nhsresearchscotland.org.uk/services/research-ethics

https://www.myresearchproject.org.uk/Help/Information.aspx

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/research_knowledge/ethics-governance.aspx

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/Rs/

In addition to gaining favourable ethical opinion, you must also meet research governance requirements, and negotiate access to your research site.

For those students who may be data collecting within the NHS, the NHS R&D Forum have put together resources and guides for researchers and NHS R&D offices. These provide additional support and explanation to add to the guidance already available on the R&D forum website.

http://www.rdforum.nhs.uk/content/resources/

5.3 Literature Review

A key component of the master’s dissertation is the Literature Review which should not exceed 6000 words (weighting 40% of overall mark).

Further details of the exact layout of the literature review are shown in appendix 3.

It is expected that the student will lay out a clear explanation of the problem, issue or area they are going to investigate and why they have chosen it and the key review question(s). The student will also then outline the approach/design, presenting your rationale for your selection of papers, and advantages and disadvantages of your methods. Include as appropriate search criteria, and databases, selected number of papers, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Include limitations of the studies. We would expect the student to critically review previous work on the proposed topic, addressing both the topic and how previous researchers have investigated it. The student should show evidence of exploring in depth, and critiquing the existing papers, summarising what they add to the literature and areas that need to be developed, debating the issues arising from the review, including any implications for practice.The student may wish to identify further research questions that may arise in the future.

5.4 Research Project Paper

The final aspect of the Masters portfolio is preparing a paper for publication that should not exceed 5,000 words (weighting 40%). Your paper should also be written in the style recommended for your chosen journal.A full description of the layout of this paper is in appendix 4 and information on “Agreement of Authorship” is in appendix 5.

5.4.1 FormatGuidelines on the suggested format for the final submission of a paper for publication are presented in Appendix 3 but the exact format will depend on the style of the journal which you have chosen to submit the paper to.

5.5 Agreement of authorshipLast updated October 2016 8

http://www.rdforum.nhs.uk/content/resources/

To ensure clarity, you are requested to discuss future publication issues with your supervisor, come to an agreement, and sign the agreement of authorship form in Appendix 6. This should be submitted to the Portfolio Co-ordinator with your formative proposal/plan. There is the expectation that students will take steps to disseminate the paper for publication. If this is not actioned within two years the academic team retain the right to utilise the data for publication.

5.6 Approval to proceed

Approval to proceed with your portfolio is not automatic. If the synopsis (Appendix 1), or the formative outline proposal for the research portfolio, (Appendix 2) are found to be unsatisfactory by the postgraduate programme committee, you may be requested to resubmit them.

6. The supervised portfolio period

1. The Programme Convener or module co-ordinator, on behalf of the Programme Committee, will inform you, in writing, when the formal supervised period of research or study for the portfolio will start and end.

2. The start date will be subject to the School Board for Examiners’ decision that you have completed and passed a minimum of 90 M level credits before you can proceed to the Masters Research portfolio.

3. The formal supervised period should not exceed 24 months from the date of approval of your synopsis for your research portfolio.

4. You will be told, in writing, the latest date for submission of the portfolio.

5. The date for the submission of your completed portfolio will normally be one month before the date for the Examinations Board and at least three months before the end of the total period of registration for post-graduate students.

The registration period for the portfolio is set at a maximum of 24 months from approval to proceed, subject to the regulations on the maximum period of registration for the MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy award (7 years). The minimum period for portfolio work to be completed for part-time students is 2 semesters.

You will be encouraged not to delay the process of completing your portfolio; however, more importance will be placed on the quality and maturity of your work than on the speed with which you achieve it. Your target date for submission should be discussed and agreed with your academic supervisor and the agreed date submitted in writing to the Portfolio Co-ordinator. If a revision to the submission date is necessary and possible within the registration period, the agreed date must be notified to the Portfolio Co-ordinator.

A typical time line for part-time students is given in Appendix 6.


7 Roles and Responsibilities

7.1 Portfolio Supervisors will be appointed by the Programme Committee or representative, based on their specialist expertise and research experience. They will be responsible for:

a) providing guidance on the student’s chosen field of study;b) advising on data, literature sources and copyright;c) advising on the plan for the portfolio proposal;d) suggesting specialists whom the student may consult for additional

advice;e) providing the student with supervisory sessions as contracted, giving

support and monitoring progress; f) facilitating planning and writing and giving advice on the necessary

completion dates of successive stages of the work in order to meet the submission deadline;

g) ensuring academic rigour; h) liaising with employer supervision; andi) reporting progress to the Programme Committee.

Supervision: Criteria for becoming a supervisor of MSc Practice Based Portfolio trainees (modules 9-12):

Masters or Doctoral level research degree CBT expertise Expertise in the specialist clinical area Willing to commit to 5 hours of supervision and additional time for marking

written work

In addition trainees undertaking the Practice Based Portfolio will be allocated an academic supervisor who is part of the core programme team and meets the following criteria:

Masters or Doctoral level research degree CBT expertise Willing to commit to 5 hours of supervision and additional time for marking

written work

The thesis is undertaken in an independent manner; the supervisor merely facilitates the process. To make effective use of this supervision time students should prepare for meetings carefully. Any draft sections should be submitted to the supervisor allowing a minimum of 48 hours for the supervisor to read the draft before the meeting.

The 10 hours allocated for supervision includes all reading time by the supervisor and all technical and statistical support.

7.2 Student’s role: As a participant the student is required to:a) decide on the proposed area of study in consultation with the Portfolio

Supervisor and, if appropriate, the employer;


b) discuss with the allocated supervisor the type of guidelines and form of contact most helpful, and come to agreement on a schedule of meetings;

c) take the initiative in raising problems or difficulties with the supervisor;d) produce work in accordance with the schedule agreed with the

supervisor, ensuring that material is presented in sufficient time to allow for comment, discussion and alterations before proceeding to the next stage;

e) take account of: - referencing guidelines;- rules about plagiarism;- the academic appeals procedure; - ethics relating to research;- regulations governing the presentation of the portfolio.

f) meet the submission deadline.

7.3 The role of the Programme Committee or their representative(s) is to:

a) advise students of staff members' research interests;b) obtain advice and recommendations from departments relating to

portfolio matters;c) approve, moderate, modify and advise on portfolio proposals;d) approve academic supervisors;e) approve nominations of expert or professional advisors.f) provide links between students seeking help in deciding on portfolio

topics and staff expertise and research interests;g) approve the commencement of the supervised period of portfolio work

subsequent to approval of the proposal;h) receive progress reports;i) approve internal examiners.j) assisting the student to decide on an area of study for the portfolio and

on identifying further possible sources of information;k) assisting in the appointment of an appropriate supervisor and of an

examiner, for the portfolio.

7.4 The portfolio co-ordinator and programme leader roles

These members of the team will: arrange for introductory sessions to portfolio work as members of the Postgraduate Programme Committee, assist in

relation to the approval of your synopsis, the allocation of your supervisor and the appointment of an examiner

act as a point of contact should you have any concerns about access to/working with your supervisor

provide you with an opportunity to evaluate this part of the MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy programme.

7.5 The local supervisor role

The portfolio is highly likely to require the cooperation of your workplace so a local supervisor is recommended. This member of the team will: support and encourage your progress through discussion of current

practice and its context. provide guidance on the student’s chosen field of study advise on data and literature sources relevant to the chosen topic advise on the plan for the portfolio proposal


suggest specialists whom the student may consult for additional advice provide the student with supervisory sessions as contracted, giving

support and monitoring progress. Help the student consider ethical implications of the chosen portfolio. Add expertise on the chosen subject area.

8. The Presentation of the Research Portfolio

The structure of the research portfolio will be dependant on the subject area requirements and examples of presentations are given in the appendices. Some variation may be appropriate and should be discussed with your supervisor.

Draft versions of portions of the portfolio should be submitted to your supervisor as early as possible so that feedback can be given about content, level of analysis, structure, style and presentation.

The research portfolio should be submitted to the following specifications:

a) Two copies of the portfolio should be submitted by the date stipulated in the assessment schedule; normally one month before the examination board. You will also be asked to submit one electronic copy following the usual assignment submission procedure.

b) Portfolio must be presented: in a permanent legible (word processed or typed) form on 80 or 90 grams A4 white paper. Arial or Times New Roman 11 or 12 font and double spacing

should be used. The left margins should be set at 1.25 inches to allow enough

room for binding, the right margin should be set at 0.75 inches for single sided printing;

c) Illustrations should be dry mounted or computer scanned. Figures, tables and diagrams may be inserted into the text, with adjacent legends or titles. Relevant audio visual records to be consulted in conjunction with the text must be fully labelled.

d) Referencing should follow the APA format.

e) The portfolio should be comb bound in laminated card and the cover should contain the following information:

Title Candidate’s NameCandidate’s Matriculation numberName of AwardName of UniversityDate of Submission.

9. Plagiarism

You are reminded that your portfolio must be your own work. What is plagiarism?


Plagiarism is the presentation of another person’s work as though it was the writer’s own. All quotations from other sources, whether published or unpublished, must be properly acknowledged. Plagiarism is a serious academic offence and, if proven, may result in disqualification of the award of MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy.

How to avoid plagiarism.Properly acknowledge all quotations from other sources, whether published or unpublished in the text (and in the reference list).

Try to avoid quoting directly. Put the ideas into your own words and acknowledge the source in your text (and in the reference list).

The University website addresses some aspects of plagiarism and this can be found at:

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/els/Plagiarism.htm

10. Assessment The credits awarded to the MSc portfolio is equivalent to four taught modules (60 Masters level 11 credits). The three components are weighted as follows:

i) proposal 20%

ii) literature review 40%

iii) research paper 40%

The pass mark is 50% for each component and all elements need to pass to be successful. Assessment will normally be by a member of staff appointed as the first independent marker and by your supervisor as the second marker. The feedback will follow the format as set out in Appendix 7. The assessors will agree marks for design, analysis, execution, presentation and general comments using the criteria presented in section 10.1.

Not all criteria apply to all types of portfolio. However, the postgraduate attributes presented in section 10.2 apply to all postgraduate work.An oral examination of the portfolio is not normally required. Exceptionally, oral examination may be offered at the request of the External Examiner.


http://www.qmu.ac.uk/els/Plagiarism.htm

10.1 Assessment Criteria

QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY

School of Health Sciences: MSc RESEARCH PROJECT

MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy : RESEARCH PROJECT MARKING CRITERIA

A Grade: 80%+

Design

Extensive and exceptionally well-synthesised, critical and in-depth review of literature.

Research, aim/question/hypothesis clearly outlined and aligned and related to current state of knowledge.

Subsidiary questions/hypotheses aligned incorporated where appropriate.Ambitious, original and comprehensive research design.Rationale for methodology fully discussed and literature utilised exceptionally well to support rationaleLinks between method and theory firmly and clearly established.Full awareness of ethical implications.Provision made for all major sources of bias, both obvious and potential.Sampling appropriate and theoretically informed.Efforts made to ensure external validity of findings.Exceptional comprehension of research design demonstrated

Analysis Highly comprehensive and profound.Original, imaginative and critical interpretation of data.Discussion related fully to existing knowledge and initial research question/hypothesis.Data from various sources exceptionally well synthesised to construct an overall picture.Correct choice and mastery of any statistical manoeuvres used.Full consideration of both confirmatory and disconfirmatory data.Original and imaginative consideration of practical implications of findings and ideas for further investigation.Full consideration of limitations of present study.Insightful and comprehensive discussion of any ethical implications.Ability to challenge existing theory and develop new alternatives. Links the research project to relevant practice areas.

Execution Validation of instruments (e.g. piloting, calibration) carried out where appropriate.All procedures clearly described, such as to allow full replication.Evidence of adaptability in the light of changing factors/emerging information.Methodical approach.High degree of initiative.Relevant advice and help sought, but major achievement of project unmistakably the student’s own.Mature, collaborative relationship established with supervisor.Optimum and economical use of resources.Demonstrates exceptional ability in executing the research project.


Presentation Appropriate sub-division of text into sections.Text clear and succinct, with no ambiguity.Consistent use of appropriate terminology.References, graphs, tables, figures of publishable quality.No inaccuracies of any significance.An exceptionally high level of attention to detail.

General Exceptional ability in synthesising all elements of the research project.High degree of analytic capability and originality of thought.Student displays outstanding potential for pursuing independent research at a higher level.

B Grade: 70 – 79%

Design

Extensive, well-synthesised, critical and in-depth review of literature.

Research, aim/question/hypothesis clearly outlined and related to current state of knowledge.

Subsidiary questions/hypotheses incorporated where appropriate.Ambitious and comprehensive research design.Rationale for methodology fully discussed.Links between method and theory firmly established.Full awareness of ethical implications.Provision made for all major sources of bias, both obvious and potential.Sampling appropriate and theoretically informed.Efforts made to ensure external validity of findings.

Analysis Highly comprehensive. Imaginative and critical interpretation of data.Discussion related fully to existing knowledge and initial research question/hypothesis.Data from various sources synthesised to construct an overall picture.Correct choice and mastery of any statistical manoeuvres used.Full consideration of both confirmatory and disconfirmatory data.Thoughtful and imaginative consideration of practical implications of findings and ideas for further investigation.Full consideration of limitations of present study.Comprehensive discussion of any ethical implications.

Execution Validation of instruments (e.g. piloting, calibration) carried out where appropriate.All procedures clearly described, such as to allow full replication.Evidence of adaptability in the light of changing factors/emerging information.Methodical approach.High degree of initiative.Relevant advice and help sought, but major achievement of project unmistakably the student’s own.Mature, collaborative relationship established with supervisor.Optimum and economical use of resources.

Presentation Appropriate sub-division of text into sections.Text clear and succinct, with no ambiguity.Consistent use of appropriate terminology.References, graphs, tables, figures of high quality No inaccuracies of any significance.Generally a high level of attention to detail.


General High degree of analytic capability.Student capable of pursuing independent research at a higher level.

C Grade: 60 – 69%

DesignComprehensive and critical literature review possibly lacking in discrimination.Reasonably clear aim/research question/hypothesis. Modest research design.Methodology justified.Awareness of major ethical implications.Attention paid to most sources of bias.Appropriate sampling. Most procedures adequately described.

Analysis Relevant findings adduced for conclusions.Relevant discussion, related to existing knowledge and present research question/hypothesis.Generally sound choice and use of any statistical manoeuvres employed.Full consideration of both confirmatory but possibly insufficient attention to disconfirmatory data. Discussion of practical implications of findings and ideas for further investigation.Discussion of any shortcomings of the project.Sound discussion of most ethical implications.

Execution Efficient and economical.Appropriate help and advice sought and largely acted upon.Good exchange established with supervisor.Good use of resources.Evidence of effort.

Presentation Appropriate sub-division of text into sections.Reasonable standard of neatness and accuracy.References, graphs, tables, figures mostly legible and accurate.Negligible errors.Generally a reasonable level of clarity and attention to detail.

General Demonstrates analytic capability but lacking some depth or critique in some areas Student would require further assistance if pursuing independent research at a higher level.


D Grade: 50 – 59%

DesignLess complete literature review or review possibly lacking in discrimination Research aim/question/hypothesis less clearly specified. Acceptable, but unambitious, research design. Methodology not fully justified.Possible lack of alignment between research questions, approach, design and data collection methodsLess awareness of some ethical implications.Some sources of bias possibly not catered for.Appropriate sampling.Most procedures adequately described.

Analysis Discussion incomplete with possible superficiality or irrelevancies Some unsubstantiated conclusions Relevant discussion related to research question/hypothesis.Limited skill in choice and use of any statistical manoeuvres employed.Less evidence of ability to weigh conflicting or inconsistent data. Limited discussion of practical implications of findings and ideas for further investigation.Shortcomings of the project possibly not fully addressed. Ethical implications discussed less comprehensively.

Execution Reasonably efficient. Help and advice sought, but not always acted upon appropriately. Possibly too little or too much use made of supervisor. Fewer signs of initiative and sustained effort.

Presentation Less acceptable level of neatness and accuracy.References, graphs, tables, figures may contain some inaccuracies, be incomplete or difficult to interpret. Some parts of the report unclear.

General An acceptable but limited, less complete report, lacking in originality. Less evidence of analytic capability.Student would require considerable assistance if pursuing independent research at a higher level.

Fail Grade: 0 – 49% Report falls short of a significant number of the above criteria.


10.2 QMU Attributes of Performance


School of Health Sciences: MSc RESEARCH PORTFOLIO

POSTGRADUATE DESCRIPTORS with effect from academic year 2015-16; approved by Senate May 2015

http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/postgraduate%20descriptors%202015.pdf

Grade A* 80%+ Outstanding performance, exceptionally able – pass

Mastery of the specialist area that demonstrates exceptional insight and breadth of knowledge. • Exceptional comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base. • Presents extensive evidence of outstanding scholarship with exceptional critical analysis and consistent deep knowledge of the specialist and related areas. • Demonstrates outstanding awareness of and sensitivity to the limitations of evidence • Outstanding ability to challenge and develop existing theory and/or professional practice within the specialist area. • Demonstrates outstanding originality, creativity or innovation in the application of knowledge and / or practice • Demonstrates exceptional synthesis in development and inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Displays outstanding potential to undertake research or be a leading practitioner within a specialist area. • Demonstrates exceptional ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines. • Outstanding ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical, visual) • Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade A 70- 79.9% Excellent performance [distinction mark is 70%] - pass

• Mastery of the specialist area that demonstrates excellent insight and breadth of knowledge. • Excellent comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base. • Presents extensive evidence of excellent scholarship including critical analysis and deep knowledge of the specialist and related areas. • Demonstrates excellent awareness of and sensitivity to the limitations of evidence • Excellent ability to challenge existing theory and/or professional practice within the specialist area with some insight into potential developments. • Demonstrates excellent creativity or innovation in the application of knowledge and / or practice with potential originality • Demonstrates excellent synthesis in development and inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policies and practice.




• Displays excellent potential to undertake research or be a leading practitioner within a specialist area. • Demonstrates excellent ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines. • Excellent ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical, visual) • Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade B 60- 69.9% Very Good performance [merit mark is 60-69.9%] - pass

• Very good insight and breadth of knowledge in specialist area. • Very good comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base. • Presents evidence of very good scholarship including critical analysis and some depth of knowledge of the specialist and related areas. • Demonstrates very good awareness of and some sensitivity to the limitations of evidence • Very good ability to challenge existing theory and/or professional practice within the specialist area with some insight into potential developments. • Demonstrates some creativity or innovation in the application of knowledge and / or practice. • Demonstrates very good synthesis in development and inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Displays some potential to undertake research or lead practice within a specialist area. • Demonstrates very good ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines. • Very good ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade C 50- 59.9% Satisfactory performance - pass

• Satisfactory insight and knowledge in specialist area. • Some comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base. • Presents some evidence of scholarship including critical analysis but lacking depth or critique in some areas. • Demonstrates some awareness of and some sensitivity to the limitations of evidence but these may not always be clearly articulated or understood • Presents existing theory or comments on practice within the specialist area but with unsubstantiated claims or limited insight into alternative perspectives. • Superficial understanding in the application of knowledge. • Limited synthesis in development and inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Some ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines. • Satisfactory ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade D 40-49.9% Unsatisfactory performance - fail

• Unsatisfactory insight and knowledge in specialist area.


• Insufficient evidence of scholarly techniques and / or knowledge of the research-base. • Lacks critical analysis or depth of argument in some areas. • Limited awareness of the evidence with muddled understanding • Presents some theory or comments on practice but highly descriptive and uncritical with unsubstantiated claims. • Limited ability to apply knowledge. • Limited synthesis of concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Limited ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines. • Limited ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Does not meet all the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade E 30-39.9% Unsatisfactory performance - fail

• Unsatisfactory insight and knowledge in specialist area. • Lack of evidence of scholarly techniques and / or knowledge of the research-base. • Lack of critical analysis or depth of argument. • Lack of awareness of the evidence and muddled understanding • Presents little theory or limited comments on practice with highly descriptive and unsubstantiated claims. • Lack of ability to apply knowledge. • Lack of synthesis of concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Lack of ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines. • Lack of ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Does not meet all the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade F 20-29.9% Unsatisfactory performance - fail

• Unsatisfactory insight or knowledge in specialist area. • No evidence of scholarly techniques with minimal knowledge of the evidence or the research-base. • Lack of analysis, depth of argument or attempts to apply knowledge. • Presents minimal relevant theory or relevant comments on practice. • Lack of attempt to synthesis concepts, theories, policies and practice. • Very poor ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade G <20% Unsatisfactory performance and non-submission - fail

• No insight or knowledge in specialist area. • No evidence of scholarly techniques or knowledge of the research-base. • No analysis or depth of argument. • No awareness or understanding of the evidence. • Presents no relevant theory or relevant comments on practice. • No attempt to apply knowledge. • No attempt to synthesis concepts, theories, policies and practice. • No evidence of ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines.


• Extremely poor ability to communicate knowledge (written, verbal, practical) • Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.


11. Module descriptor

Title Practice Based Project (Modules 9 – 12) Code (if known)

SHE Level M Semester & Mode of Study

Part time Credit Rating

SCQF Level

Level 11 60

Module Co-ordinator Dr Sean Harper

Module Team Dr Sean Harper, Dr Shirley Platz, Dr Leeanne Nicklas,

Pre-requisites Successful completion of Diploma Co-requisitesProhibited CombinationsAims1) enable students to develop and apply the skills of research and inquiry as it applies in practice

to a specialised area in the field of CBT

2) engage students in practice and study which demands a professional approach, academic rigour, independence and self-direction

Learning Outcomes On successful completion of the module the student will be able to:

Assessed in this module

A B C D

L1 Explore and apply relevant research approaches and clinical skills, to the chosen option.

Yes √ √ √

L2 Critically evaluate the existing literature appropriate to the chosen research topic.

Yes √ √

L3 Develop critically, strategically and in depth a topic or area of interest within the chosen option.

Yes √ √

L4 Critically appraise the ethical implications of the proposal, focusing on an examination of the roles and responsibilities of a (neophyte) researcher

Yes √ √

L5 Develop further skills of practice and inquiry, demonstrating an ability to set the project in its wider context, to sustain argument and to present conclusions.

Yes √ √ √

L6 Present and be able to defend the rationale, approach or methodology, outcomes and conclusions of their project

Yes √ √

A – Knowledge and Understanding B – Intellectual Skills C – Practical Skills


D – Transferable Skills

Learning Experiences The module will engage the student in the following types of learning experiences:Students will select one of the specialised options: Personality Disorders, Bipolar Disorder, Eating Disorders, Psychosis, CBT Supervision, developments in CBT training, practice and dissemination or the student’s specialist interest as approved by course team.10 hours maximum supervision.590 hours self directed learning.6 hours research skills workshops.

Assessment Pattern

Assessment involves three components which investigate a topic within the chosen specialist area of CBT (13,000 words across the three components submitted as a portfolio of research papers). The project component will involve an exploratory piece of research which would include designing and undertaking a research project including choosing appropriate research questions, epistemology, methodology, collecting data, analysing data and drawing appropriate conclusions from your study. Due consideration should be given to ethical requirements of the study and appropriate Research and Development procedures should be observed. The project could be in the form of a small scale, service related audit, service based evaluation, a single N or case series design. A range of research approaches or project methodology may be adopted, drawing for example from phenomenological, case study, implementation science or action research paradigms and using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods of data collection and analysis. The components of the Masters portfolio include:

d. A Research Proposal; (2000 words.) This would detail the title and rationale of the chosen research project, and then appraise the relevant research methodologies, epistemology and comprehensive consideration of ethical issues. Weighting 20%

e. A Literature Review: (6000 words.) This would be a comprehensive literature review focusing on a topic related to a specific aspect of the research proposal which critically appraises and synthesises the evidence pertaining to a specific area explored in the proposal. Weighting 40%

f. Research Project Paper: suitable for publication (5000 words) in journal article format. The student should identify an appropriate journal in which they wish to publish and follow appropriate style. The paper would summarise the above literature review along with any other relevant literature, detail the actual project undertaken and present ready to be submitted for publication, with some discussion of a potential route of dissemination such as work based report, publication, poster, etc. Weighting 40%

All elements need to be passed to be successful.

Can this Module be Anonymously marked? Yes/No If No please provide an explanation.The dissertation will be marked by internal supervisors so cannot be done so anonymouslyContent


This is dependent on the option undertaken. Supervision will be provided by specialist supervisors.

Main TextsThese will be defined by the option area and appropriate to area of study. See option specific section of project handbook for details.Barker, C., Pistrang, N. and Elliot, R. (2002). Research Methods in Clinical Psychology: An Introduction for students and Practitioners- 2nd Edition. Chichester: Wiley.Becker L (2004) How to manage your postgraduate course. Palgrave MacmillanBell J. (2005) (4th ed) Doing Your Research Project: a guide to first time researchers in education and social science. Maidenhead OU Press.Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2010) How to Research-4th Edition. Open University Press.Clarke, M., & Oxman, A.D., (2003) Cochrane Reviewers Handbook. 4.2.0 Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2003.Coolican, H., (2009) Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology-5th Edition. Routledge.Cuttie D (2005) Developing and applying study skills, writing assignments, dissertations and management reports London Chartered Institute of Personnel and DevelopmentDay, A., (2008.) How to get research published in Journals -2nd Edition. Gower.Denscombe, M., (2010). The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects. Buckingham, Open University.Fairbairn G.J. & Fairbairn S (2001) Reading at University: a guide for students Buckinghamshire OU PressField A, and Hole G, (2003) How to design and report Experiments. Sage, London.Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review. Sage, LondonJarvis P Holford J Griffin C (2003) The theory and practice of learning London Kogan PageJasper M (2003) Beginning reflective practice Cheltenham Nelson ThornesKatrak, P., Bialocerkowski,A.E., Massy-Westropp, N., Kumar, S., & Grimmer, K.A. (2004) A systematic Review of the Content of Critical Appraisal Tools. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2004, 4:22O’Brien, P.M.S., & Pipkin, F.B. (1999) Introduction to Research Methodology for Specialists and Trainees. RCOG Press.Parker,R.I., & Brossart D.F.(2003) Evaluating Single Case research data: A comparision of seven statistical methods . Behavioural Therapy, 34, 189-211.Parry, G. & Watts, F.N. (1996) Behavioural and Mental Health Research: A Handbook of Skills and Methods-2nd Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd. Hove.Petermann, F. & Muller, J.M. (2001) Clinical Psychology and single case evidence: A practical approach to treatment planning and evaluation. Wiley.Sommer, B. & Sommer, R. (2001) A Practical Guide to Behavioural Research: Tools and techniques-5th Edition. Oxford University Press.Wallace M Wray A (2006) Critical reading and writing for Postgraduates London: Sage

Other relevant detailsProgramme specific issues are outlined in the project handbook

SignedModule Co-ordinator Dr Sean Harper

DateOctober 2016


Registry use only Date received


Appendix 1


MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy – PORTFOLIO/PROJECT SYNOPSIS

Student’s Name: ____________________________________________________

This outline (maximum 750 words) should be a carefully considered starting point from which your full portfolio will evolve in discussion with your supervisor. It is on the basis of this outline that an appropriate supervisor will be appointed.

Title of portfolio:

Proposed Format (e.g. empirical study, work-based project, single case design):

Reason for choice of topic:

Objectives of the:i) project ii) literature review

Outline of approach/design of the project and literature review:

Return this form to: _____________________ By: ______________________

Signature: _____________________________ Date: _____________________Last updated October 2016 26

Appendix 2

MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy – PORTFOLIO

GUIDELINES – RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Follow the suggestion on this page about format. The length of the proposal should not exceed 2000 words.

TitleThis should contain the relevant key words and concepts, showing clearly the focus of the intended investigation

Introduction and background literatureExplain the problem, issue or area you are going to investigate and why you have chosen it. Include a short review of key literature to put your project in context of current/seminal work in the field

Aim/objectives of the studyState the aim of the proposed research with the key research question(s) or hypothesis (-es)

MethodologyOutline the approach/design; include as appropriate, nature of the population, sample size and power, access to subjects and process of selection, independent and extraneous variables, issues of rigour, and procedures to be used for analysis.

Ethical considerationsComplete and append the Research Ethics Release Form. Include for the Head of Department any explanatory notes and/or relevant forms prepared. Explain whether or not your portfolio requires further ethical approval, (e.g. Research ethics committees/ local R&D departments.

TimetableIllustrate diagrammatically the timescale of the portfolio.

ResourcesOutline the resources/budget you will require. Projects that are expensive in terms of resources may not be approved.

ReferencesThese should conform to APA guidelines.

Notes: a copy of the outline proposal should be given to the Portfolio Co-ordinator within

4 months of commencement of the MSc modules. an outline proposal will be necessary when applying for ethical approval this outline proposal should be completed, in consultation with the academic

supervisor, by all students undertaking an empirical study.


Appendix 3. Literature Review

This is the suggested format for the Literature Review which should not exceed 6000 words.

TitleThis should contain the relevant key words and concepts, showing clearly the focus of the intended review.

Abstract: This is a summary of the content of the review. (maximum 300 words)

IntroductionExplain the problem, issue or area you are going to investigate and why you have chosen it.

Aim/objectives of the studyState the aim of the literature review with the key review question(s.)

MethodologyOutline the approach/design, presenting your rationale for your selection of papers, and advantages and disadvantages of your methods. Include as appropriate search criteria, and databases, selected number of papers, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Include limitations of the study. Refer the reader to the appendices which could include a flow chart of selection of papers and potentially a table summarising included papers and their key outcomes.

Literature ReviewCritically review previous work on your proposed topic, addressing both the topic and how previous researchers have investigated it. Explore in depth, and critique the existing papers summarising what they add to the literature and areas that need to be developed.

DiscussionDebate the issues arising from your proposal, including implications for practice.You may wish to identify further research questions that may arise in the future.

ConclusionBring your work to a conclusion, identifying proposed methods of dissemination and utilisation of findings.

ReferencesThese should conform to APA guidelines.

Appendices:Flow chart Summary Table


Appendix 4. GUIDELINES – Research Project.

This is the suggested format if you are undertaking empirical research of 5,000 words. Your paper should also be written in the style recommended for your chosen journal.

Normally, the research project paper will contain the following:

Abstract: a summary of the content of the project and the main conclusions reached (maximum 250 words)

Introduction: this should clearly define the area you have examined, the reason for focusing on this and the steps you have taken to explore and further empirical knowledge within the topic. It may also include, if relevant, a brief description of your organisation or work context

Literature review: this should take the form of a critique of material drawn from several sources, such as books, journal articles, reports or audio-visual material and should expand on the rationale for your chosen area of investigation.

Aims and Objectives: List 1-3 key questions or hypothesis you are hoping to explore in your chosen project.

Methodology: this should include the theoretical framework guiding methods of enquiry; the rationale for your choice of approach/design; sampling and ethical issues; data collection methods; approach to data analysis; statistical methods where relevant; discussion of the strengths and limitations of the methodology

Results: findings should be presented clearly

Discussion: here you should present detailed consideration of the findings and analyses, in the context of methodology and relevant literature, with an assessment of inferences made

Conclusions and recommendations: this should be a brief resume of the key findings in relation to the stated aim(s) and objectives, the research process through which it was investigated and the conclusions reached. Recommendations may be made, for example, in relation to further research or changes in practice or policy

References: using the format recommended by the journal you have selected to submit to. List all sources referred to in the text.

Appendices: these should be numbered in sequence and may contain material relevant to the work but not essential for inclusion in the main body of the text: for example, interview schedules, questionnaires, diagrams, examples of data, tables, diagrams etc.


Appendix 5

Agreement of Authorship

School of Health & Social Sciences

This form should be signed by the student and supervisor, and submitted with the formative research proposal. The student is advised to photocopy and retain a copy of this agreement.

The postgraduate student may have the opportunity to submit a manuscript for publication, which will contribute to the body of knowledge in your professional area. Agreements between students and supervisors regarding authorship or any publication or oral presentation resulting from the research portfolio carried out in partial fulfilment of any postgraduate programme within the School of Health Sciences, will normally be based on the following definition:

AuthorshipAll persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship. The order of authorship should be a joint decision for the co-authors. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take responsibility for the content.

Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to (a) conception and design or analysis and interpretation of data; and to (b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on (c) final approval of the version to be published. Conditions (a), (b), and (c) must all be met. Participate solely on the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is also not sufficient for authorship. Any part of an article critical in its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author.

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors 1991, 1991, New England Journal of Medicine, 324:424 – 428.

Note: To qualify for authorship, all authors must approve the final version of the publication. There is a need, therefore, for all authors to remain in contact until the final version has been accepted for publication.

Acknowledgement

There is also an ethical obligation to recognise and identify the work of others where it has contributed to the work being reported in a publication. At an appropriate place in the publication, one or more statements should specify: (a) contributions that need acknowledging but do not justify authorship; (b) acknowledgement of technical help;


(c) acknowledgement of financial or material support, specifying the nature of the support; and (d) financial (or other) relationships that may pose a conflict of interest.

We, the undersigned, agree to the terms, as detailed above, related to authorship and acknowledgement.

Student________________________________________________________

Supervisor________________________________________________________

Date________________________________________________________

This agreement does not supersede the Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, policies and procedures.


Appendix 6

Timeplan for the Portfolio for Part-Time Students

Portfolio Co-ordinator: Dr Sean Harper ([email protected])

The following is the suggested timeplan for a part-time student, who is intending to complete the portfolio in 2 years:

Step 1 Choose your topic [August 2016-October 2016]

Step 2 Submit synopsis to Postgraduate Programme Committee (PPC) for approval.

The Programme Project Committee (PPC) meets on October 25th, so your 1 page synopsis should be submitted to the portfolio co-ordinator by October 18th at the latest. This can be submitted by email.Approval is not automatic, as topic has to be assessed for feasibility, and whether it can be supervised appropriately.From the date of this approval, you have a maximum of 24 months to submit.After this PPC you will be informed in writing of your supervisor’s name and contact details.

Step 3 Arrange meetings to work with your supervisor, so that a proposal, ethical approval (where applicable), and agreement of authorship can be submitted to the portfolio co-ordinator and added to your file. There is no set date for this, but you would be advised to complete this by the end of January 2017 (i.e. the proposal should be submitted for formal marking within 4 months of commencing the MSc programme). The proposal will marked and you will receive feedback within 8 weeks of submission.

Step 4 Supervised dissertation/portfolio period continue.

Step 5 Submit portfolio by 2nd August 2018.The portfolio will be marked within 8 weeks and submitted to the next available Exam Board. If you do not meet this deadline, discuss your intended submission date with your supervisor, and inform the portfolio co-ordinator in writing of the revised date.


Appendix 7

RESEARCH PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT – MSc in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Proposal Feedback Sheet

Introduction to Research Proposal

The title of the project should clearly highlight the focus of the intended investigation. An overview of the literature relating to the research objective is presented. The rationale for the proposed research is clearly established, with an outline of key research question(s). Demonstrates knowledge of chosen research area. The research area should relate to appropriate professional interests with the potential to lead to innovation in that subject (normally relating to CBT theory or practice).

Comments

Research Design

1) The relevant research methodologies and epistemology are appraised. Proposed methods of subject selection and procedures for data analysis presented.

2) There should be comprehensive consideration of ethical and practical considerations of the research with appended Research Ethics Release Forms as appropriate.

3) Required resources, feasibility and timescales of project should be presented.

Comments

Presentation of Work and Referencing

Introduction provides a clear outline of the subject area and rationale for the choice of topic. Design is concisely considered. Clear and logical structure.Well proofed and edited work. Referencing cited in the text and in the reference list is accurate and follows APA guidelines.

Comments

Overall Quality of Work

Ability to synthesis all elements of the proposal. Includes originality of thought and clear understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed design. Clear explanation and justification is provided to support proposed plans. Well-considered plan for implementation.

Comments


Overall comments on the research project

Strengths

Suggestions for improvement

Signature marker A: Date:

Signature marker B: Date:

Grade:

Students are reminded that the grade indicated is PROVISIONAL only. It must be confirmed by the External Examiner and ratified by the Board of Examiners. Please contact the internal examiner if you wish to discuss your feedback


Literature Review Feedback Form

Introduction to literature reviewA well-synthesised, critical, up-to-date, and in-depth review of appropriate literature that relates to a clear objective. Literature supports rationale for the review and previous work in the subject area is critically reviewed, highlighting a gap in the existing literature. Wide range of literature sources used. Demonstrates knowledge of chosen research area.

Comments

Review DesignJustification for review’s objectives. Aim clearly outlined and aligned with methodology and analysis approach, demonstrating alignment within literature review design. Methodology for the search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria for the selection of papers should be provided. Consideration given to the advantages and disadvantages of methods and the review’s limitations.

Comments

Analysis and DiscussionDemonstrates critical analysis of papers involved in the review. The results are clearly presented (potentially using summary tables) and a coherent argument is created. Limitations of included studies are presented.Where data has been summarised from included studies, appropriate analysis strategies are used.Discussion analyses and synthesises all elements of the literature review and links to relevant practice. Discusses potential impact of the review findings and areas of further enquiry.

Comments

Presentation of work and referencingAbstract provides a coherent succinct overview of the review. Introduction provides a clear outline of the subject area and rationale for the choice of topic. Conclusions synthesise main findings of the review. Clear and logical structure.Well proofed and edited work. Referencing cited in the text and in the reference list is accurate and follows APA guidelines.

Comments

Overall Quality of WorkAbility to synthesise all elements of the review. Includes originality of thought and subject area adds to the existing literature. Clear explanation and justification is provided to support claims. Well-constructed argument.

Comments


Overall comments on the literature review

Strengths




Grade:



Research Project Feedback Form

Introduction to the literatureA well-synthesised, critical, up-to-date, and in-depth review of appropriate literature that creates a clear context to the study. Wide range of literature sources used. Original sources of literature used as far as possible rather than secondary sources. Literature supports rationale for research project. Demonstrates knowledge of chosen research area.

Comments

Research DesignJustification for research project aim / question / hypothesis. Aim clearly outlined and aligned with epistemology, methodology, methods and analysis approach, demonstrating alignment within the research design. Comprehensive justification of sampling, reliability, validity and ethical issues. Consideration given to the study’s limitations.

Comments

Analysis and DiscussionDemonstrates critical analysis of literature, research design choices, and results (where applicable), and creates a coherent argument. Discussion analyses and synthesises all elements of the research project and links to relevant practice.Where data has been collected, appropriate analysis strategies used and accounts for supporting and unsupporting data .Where data has not been collected, justification provided for the analysis methods proposed in relation to chosen methodology. Discusses issues likely to arise from undertaking the research.

Comments

Execution of research project undertakenAttention given to practical considerations within the research process e.g. piloting, timetabling and resource implications. A critical perspective is taken on the research process. Any data collected is analysed using appropriate methods, presented clearly, and includes discussion of the relevance of results. Where data has not been collected, there is acknowledgement of potential setbacks in the research process.

Comments

Presentation of work and referencingAbstract provides a coherent succinct overview of the project. Introduction provides a clear outline of the subject area and rationale for the choice of topic. Conclusions synthesise main elements of the research project. Clear and logical structure.Well proofed and edited work. Referencing cited in the text and in the reference list is accurate and follows APA guidelines.

Comments

Overall Quality of WorkAbility to synthesise all elements of the research project. Includes originality of thought. Clear explanation and justification is provided to support claims. Well-constructed argument.

Comments


Overall comments on the research project

Strengths




Grade:



msc cbt project handbook 2016 - … of... · web viewresearch methods in clinical psychology: an...

Documents