140

Section 12

Dissertation Handbook

Table of Contents

12. University Regulations .............................................................................................. 141 12.1 Registration .............................................................................................................. 141 12.2 Deferral/Suspension of Study ................................................................................... 141 12.3 Equality and Diversity ............................................................................................... 141 12.4 Other Important Regulations .................................................................................... 141 12.5 All Coursework Extensions and Late Submission of Assessed Work ....................... 142 12.6 Academic Conduct and Student Discipline ............................................................... 142 12.7 Double Marking Policy for all PGT Modules in SHAR ............................................... 142 12.8 Dissertation Module Details ...................................................................................... 143 12.9 Programmes in SHAR - Students Starting Dissertation ............................................ 145 12.10 Choosing a Topic ..................................................................................................... 147 12.11 The Dissertation Proposal ........................................................................................ 148 12.12 Ethical Considerations and Process ......................................................................... 151 12.13 Carrying Out Your Dissertation Project..................................................................... 156 12.14 Written Materials and Supervision ............................................................................ 157 12.15 The Dissertation ....................................................................................................... 158 12.16 Format and Content of the Dissertation .................................................................... 160 12.17 Notes for Guidance on the Preparation of Dissertations ........................................... 163 12.18 Preparing Your Dissertation for Submission ............................................................. 164 12.19 Suggested References ............................................................................................. 168 12.20 Criteria for the Assessment of Level 7 Dissertations ................................................ 169

141

12. University Regulations

All students will observe the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations of Keele University. University regulations can be seen in the University Handbook at http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/aa/newacadregpages/index.htm

A hard copy can be requested from Academic Registry . Specific regulations are cited throughout this handbook.

12.1 Registration

Students are required to register with the University within one week of commencing study. Students must re-register in each session by a date to be determined by the University

Students who withdraw or allow registration to lapse before completion of the programme of study shall not be allowed to re-register except by permission of the Senate and under such conditions as Senate may specify.

12.2 Deferral/Suspension of Study

Students who may want to defer/suspend their period of study should contact the course tutor and/or the Director of Postgraduate Studies immediately.

12.3 Equality and Diversity

This document sets out what students and staff can expect of Keele University with regard to its commitment to combating unlawful discrimination and promoting equality of opportunity for all in relation to race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, age, and religion & belief. The document can be viewed at: http://www.keele.ac.uk/hrss/equalitydiversity/

Please take the time to read this information as it has important implications for how we live and work at Keele.

12.4 Other Important Regulations

Students are also strongly recommended to read the university regulations on:

Academic warnings at: http://www.keele.ac.uk/paa/academicwarnings/

Appeals at: http://www.keele.ac.uk/ps/governance/disciplinecomplaintsgrievancesappeals/academicappeals/

Complaints at: http://www.keele.ac.uk/paa/studentappealscomplaintsandconduct/studentcomplaints/

Very important note:

There is a standard non-refundable charge of £200 if you are required to resubmit your

dissertation - known as the ‘PGTDissertation Resubmission Fee’ .

Hard copies can be requested from Academic Registry .

142

12.5 All Coursework Extensions and Late Submission of Assessed Work

See SHAR PgT Main Handbook Section 5 Assessment Information.

12.6 Academic Conduct and Student Discipline

The School takes this issue very seriously and utilises university regulations on academic conduct and general student discipline. We must point out to you that students have, in the past, been excluded from the programmes because of plagiarism.

Students are strongly advised to consult regulations in the University Handbook on plagiarism and collusion at

Regulation 8: Conduct of students in examination and in-course assessments

http://www.keele.ac.uk/regulations/regulation8/#d.en.19986

and

Regulation 20: Student discipline

http://www.keele.ac.uk/regulations/regulation20/

See SHAR PgT Main Handbook Section 5

Health and Conduct Committee and Fitness to Practice

See SHAR PgT Main Handbook

12.7 Double Marking Policy for all PGT Modules in SHAR

See SHAR PgT Main Handbook

143

12.8 Dissertation Module Details Module Title: Masters Dissertation in Faculty of Health

Module Code: PTY-40044

Level: 7 Core to MSc

Credit Value: 60 Level 7 Credits

Semester: 1 or 2 N/A – 20 weeks full time; 40 weeks part time/modular

Originating School: School of Health and Rehabilitation.

Module Leader: Dr. Jackie Waterfield Telephone: 01782 733537

Degree Scheme: Postgraduate Programmes within the Faculty of Health

Pre requisites: A postgraduate diploma in a topic relevant to the title of the degree, passed at an appropriate level, as specified by the Course Regulations.

Student Study Hours: 600 Hours

Student Contact Hours: 15 Hour Tutorials, following outline proposal submission. Student Lead Workshops (presentation workshop compulsory

Supervision: Where students undertake research in their workplace they may have a mentor from the workplace as well as a supervisor from the university BUT the Keele supervisor is responsible for ensuring that the dissertation fulfils the university’s requirements. The school is unable to offer any remuneration for mentors.

Assessment: Dissertation and in identified cases, a one hour maximum viva voce. The dissertation should not

normally exceed 15,000 words. In identified cases only a viva voce of one hour maximum may be held

Dissertation +/- viva =100% marks. Pass for MSc 50%.

Assessment Strategy: This will be based on both the proposed plan of work and implementation of the programme, and the written dissertation itself.

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

Communicate a framework of reference (such as a literature review) to show the relevance of the proposed research.

Display evidence of critical analysis, independence of thought and an understanding of advanced concepts and methods related to research.

Demonstrate the appropriateness and intellectual coherence of the research design/plan of argument for linking questions to methods and conclusions.

Select appropriate information gathering methods and implement these effectively and with a high level of judgment.

Show evidence of advanced methods of analysis and of a high level of skill in their execution.

Where appropriate, evidence of critical evaluation and reassessment of results and techniques during the research period.

Show evidence of intellectual rigour in the interpretation of the results of the analysis.

Analyse ethical issues (where appropriate).

Produce a report of appropriate style, organization and structure.

Display a high level of written English and expository methods. The dissertation will be assessed independently by two internal examiners. In addition, the two internal examiners may conduct a viva voce examination and the external examiner will see all dissertations and may attend any viva voce (and may request a viva should take place).

Reassessment: Method of reassessment is by resubmission of dissertation. Maximum mark available is 50%

at resubmission; evidence of likely successful completion will be assessed by the board. Very important note: There is a standard non-refundable charge of £200 if you are required to resubmit your dissertation - known as the ‘PGTDissertation Resubmission Fee’ . Maximum time allowed is 10 months.

Rationale: The Dissertation is the test of the Master's degree standard. The purpose of the Dissertation is to contribute substantially to the research training aim which is appropriate to a taught Master's programme. To achieve this aim the student is required to demonstrate an understanding of the philosophy and principles of research (empirical or non-empirical) and show competence in the design, execution and reporting of a research project. In this way the student's ability is developed to carry out subsequent research independently and to commission, manage and evaluate the research activities of others. The dissertation may be empirical or non-empirical in nature – the Dissertation Module Tutor and the Director of Postgraduate Studies will monitor this.

144

Teaching and Learning Strategy: There are three elements to the teaching and learning strategy:

Attendance at a research methodology course at an appropriate level which provides the student with: -an overview of the different ways in which research is perceived in the social and life sciences; -an introduction to research design, including the specification of aims, research objectives, the

scope of the topic, the information sources to be employed, methods of collection, analysis and interpretation;

-an understanding of a relevant range of research techniques.

From this understanding of research design the student will prepare a dissertation proposal based on the learning outcomes listed above and setting out a programme of work including supervisory arrangements. This stage is divided into two parts

The outline proposal will be considered by the Dissertation Module Tutor and a supervisors’ group by an agreed date, who will take a moderating role in ensuring comparability between the different approaches likely to be proposed. The content of the proposal must be demonstrably relevant to the name of the final award.

Workshops will be organised to assist students with their progress.

N.B. At this formative stage the outline proposal may be referred back to the student as not acceptable and the student will be asked to resubmit

N.B. A student whose outline proposal is referred back may find that their progress is delayed After the outline proposal is approved by the supervisors’ group the student is allocated a supervisor who will advise the student of any modifications thought to be necessary and guide the student to develop a full proposal and gain formal approval (mandatory for progression to the formal dissertation stage) and School ethical approval (SPEC) and work with them if external ethical approval is required.

The final full proposal must handed in with a SPEC form and be approved formally for the student to be able to proceed to the formal dissertation stage

Supervision will be conducted by means of tutorials based on the students work, either individually or in groups.

Workshops will be organised to assist students with their progress.

Where appropriate students will be encouraged to undertake their dissertation research in a workplace situation.

N.B. At this formative last stage the final full proposal may be referred back to the student as not acceptable

N.B. A student whose proposal is referred back will NOT be able to proceed to the dissertation formal stage.

N.B. External Examiners will formally review any proposals being sent for External Ethics as they act as the

Independent Peer Reviewer.

These formative stages are included in the overall time frame for the module

To assist the student to prepare for the dissertation the Dissertation Module Tutor will provide a calendar of events setting out the timing of arrangements for the submission and approval of a research plan, key dates in the execution of the individual student's plan, the submission date for the dissertation and the Assessment Board dates.

145

12.9 Programmes in SHAR - Students Starting Dissertation

Remember you will need 120 credits ratified by an External Examiner before you can formally register on the Dissertation module

So consider when you will complete your taught programme and plan your Dissertation dates around this

For important dates (submission of proposals, start and end dates) see KLE section for the dissertation in SHAR

Introduction

The dissertation you are about to undertake is a mandatory requirement for the master’s stage of your degree.

The aim of the dissertation is to enable you to develop your research abilities and to provide an opportunity for you to carry out a detailed study of a specialised area of personal interest. It is expected that you will develop the research skills required for independent research in your field.

All dissertations require rigour, critical thinking, clarity, and high quality presentation. There are many different ways of approaching research and you are not tied to adopting any one particular approach. Which approach you take will depend on a number of factors, including the topic you wish to study, the question you are asking, the availability of subjects, time and resources and reflection on your current skills and the skills you wish to develop. The proposal preparation stage and your supervisor will assist you in determining which is the most appropriate approach to take. What is important is that the research has some resonance with your professional or academic development and the wider context of healthcare.

Different approaches

Undertaking an Empirical Study

Any study that requires the collection of primary data (qualitative or quantitative) from participants will require School of Health and Rehabilitation Ethics Committee (SPEC) approval.

If you are collecting primary data for research in clinical practice (this includes surveys and experimental methods) from patients this will also require external ethical approval (see later section)

If you are collecting primary data about healthcare practitioners employed by the NHS, managers, using rooms or equipment on an NHS site etc. this will require some form of governance approval and local managers approval if applicable may still require external ethical approval but. (see later section)

Be aware external ethical approval has implications for the time frame of your dissertation stage. If you are considering this it is wise to discuss this as early as possible.

Service Development projects such as clinical audits and service evaluations can be undertaken, BUT the nature of these may also require external ethical approval and will

146

require your Hospital and/or Trust’s Audit and/or Research and Development/Governance committee’s approval, so early discussion is advisable.

Primary or secondary analysis of data which the student has not collected directly may be feasible if the student is undertaking part of a larger study which already has full ethical approval. Students will be advised of any studies within SHAR/Faculty that may offer this opportunity during the proposal preparation phase of the dissertation. Likewise, if a student has the opportunity to participate in a study in their clinical base, which has prior ethics approval, they may be able to undertake this as their dissertation but full details will be required for SPEC.

Primary data may be collected within SHAR or the university on students, staff and possibly on alumni of the programmes of study in SHAR.

Additionally primary data may be collected from private units such as Sports Clubs, however access to the sample and data will require management approval and ethical issues still need to be addressed.

Undertaking a Library-Based Study

Modified Systematic Reviews/Structured Reviews

This is a form of library based study where the 'data' are the empirical papers that the student reviews. This involves collecting information, which may be in the form of papers, guidelines etc., pertinent to the research question and assessing the quality and relevance of the outcomes. A quality evaluation/assessment tool will be used for example Downs and Black. Done well, this is an excellent way of exploring current practice, intervention dosage, patient information etc.

A frequent mistake made by students who undertake these studies is not formulating a clear research question, using an appropriate tool and taking a logical approach to the review. A rigorous and systematic approach to literature searching, and the ability to synthesise a range of material, are vital to the success of these studies.

Students should also ensure that they have checked relevant databases for reviews in their area of interest so they are not just repeating recent reviews.

While it is unlikely that a student would undertake a meta-analysis (i.e. a re-analysis of data pooled from several studies), they still need to have a good understanding of research and statistical methods in order to evaluate the studies included and draw appropriate conclusions relating to their aggregated findings.

Undertaking a Literature Review (Modified Narrative Review)

This is another form of library-based study. It also requires a focused overarching question (not too broad). That is, a position or proposition which a student advances and offers to maintain. This allows the student to explore the literature in their chosen area in depth, but it must also show a logical approach to that exploration and analysis for riour and quality. This usually involves exploring a concept or theory, unpicking what are the contributing elements within that concept and exploring the arguments through critical discussion.

Unlike a modified systematic review you do not use a quality tool (one which numerically scores the paper or makes a subjective judgement based on characteristics) to judge the

147

quality of the evidence. The quality of the evidence is about how well it sustains, disputes, challenges or contributes to aspects of your discussion. The work will come to some supported conclusions, bringing the constituents parts of the concept or theory back together.

The module EBP give a fuller understanding of Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis but the approach to all reviews will be covered to some degree in research methods and the dissertation workshops.

These last two approaches do not require the student to fill in a full SPEC form but appropriate notification of the study will be submitted to the SPEC as a means of the School monitoring and approving all research undertaken within it.

12.10 Choosing a Topic

The selection of your topic area is the first, and most important, step. There are several considerations that you should bear in mind.

a. It should be an area in which you are personally interested; a topic in which you feel

there are questions that you would wish to see addressed. As is the case in so many areas, research has its peaks and troughs, and if you have a special interest in your field of work, this will help sustain you through some of the more arduous parts of the research process.

b. It should be centered upon a piece of work which you envisage being able to start and

finish in the limited time available – in other words, one with a relatively predictable timescale. In particular, the actual collection of data may have to be performed in a fairly narrow 'window' of time. Longitudinal studies or projects with an 'open-ended' character will often have to be avoided, especially if you are undertaking the dissertation on a full-time basis.

c. In a similar way, it is best to avoid those projects which may depend upon fairly unpredictable factors – e.g. the availability of a scarce item of equipment, access to a narrowly defined group of clients, the uncertain agreement of certain individuals or institutions, the acquisition of special funding or resources. An unexpected turn of events could easily cause major problems.

d. It should be a topic in which you will be able to employ the research, critical and evaluation skills that you have learnt. You may also feel that you would like to address a topic centered in one of the module areas of the course, so that you can take advantage of the theoretical understanding that you have developed in the area in question.

e. You should select a project that will be predominantly of your own making. There are two advantages to this:

First, the project should be a 'learning experience', rather than just research for its own sake, and therefore the student should as far as possible, experience the 'process' of the project in its entirety.

Second, it is important that you should be able to gain credit for your own original work in as many areas of the total project as possible.

If you do decide to set your own project within a larger one, you should be aware that this may mean that you are subject to factors and circumstances outside your direct control.

However, it is important to realize that you can choose to employ a protocol previously developed by somebody else. As long as you can claim that the project is

148

predominantly of your own making, this is a perfectly acceptable way forward. You must then be clearly able to justify utilisng that protocol. Discuss this with your supervisor. You could consider repeating a review if you feel new evidence has been published or you can justify any flaws etc in the original work

f. If you are in employment, consider carefully the relevance of your chosen topic to your area of work. If you are pursuing an investigation which is germane to your own area of professional practice, colleagues and/or employers are likely to be both more able and more willing to offer you the necessary support and help. This may be particular pertinent for service development projects.

g. Examine your proposed topic to see whether it has 'symmetry of potential outcomes'; i.e. are the results likely to be equally informative and meaningful even if they go in the opposite direction to that anticipated?

Having selected your topic for study you will then need to prepare a dissertation proposal

12.11 The Dissertation Proposal

There are TWO formative stages to help the student prepare for the formal dissertation - an outline proposal stage and a full proposal stage.Thesstgesare includedin your overall module time frame.

The Purpose of the Outline Proposal and Full Proposal

The purpose of the outline proposal is to give an indication of your research for review by the postgraduate team, prior to the start of your formal dissertation stage so it is formative.

This outline gives the tutors an idea of your intentions, and also provides an opportunity to comment on or suggest alterations that might be required at this early stage, before too much work is undertaken. It also permits the identification of an appropriate supervisor.

When the student has been allocated a supervisor, their outline forms the basis for preliminary discussions on the dissertation between the student and the supervisor. It also gives an early indication as to whether review by an external ethical committee will be necessary.

The purpose of the full proposal should give the formal reviewer a good idea of your intentions, and also provides an opportunity to comment on or suggest alterations that might be useful to consider and action at this stage prior to the start of your formal dissertation stage.

The full proposal if acceptable should mean that this project has the potential to meet the requirement of a taught master’s dissertation.

What is important is to consider this as a template for the dissertation, the greater the quality of the full proposal then the greater your understanding and ability to operationalise it will be once you have formal approval and ethics if applicable

Submitting the Outline Proposal and the Full Proposal

There are two formative stages in this process:

1. An outline proposal of the intended area of study should be submitted at the required time so that any preliminary problems can be picked up at an early stage. The outline should be submitted in the form advised by Dissertation Module Tutor and found on the KLE.

149

2. The full proposal is a fuller description of your research, giving more details of your proposed methodology and plan of work. This will need to be signed off by your supervior. This proposal will be on a standard form accessible on the module folder on KLE and should follow all the guidelines to writing as in previous stages of the progamme, prior to submission to the Dissertation Module Tutor. Note also the requirement of SPEC for this submission. Submission details will be given.

The Format of the Outline Proposal

The format for the outline is identified below. The very nature of the outline (one side of A4 paper only) means that it will be more concise than the full proposal and contain only key points. However, you should try to utilize the following headings:

Outline Proposal Format: Some Guidance

Student: Name needed

Title: It should be easy to see what this project is about. This should be concise, but not so brief as to mislead the reader as to the nature of the dissertation. Short, catchy titles are sometimes used, but these should be qualified by a sub-title or other second part; e.g. 'Boys in White: Student Culture in Medical School'. You should revisit it after written the rest of this sheet to see if it reflects ideas in the methods etc.

Research site: A short sentence. Identify if it is Keele plus hospital/clinic/etc.

This should indicate the area or institution in which the study will be undertaken, if applicable. It is also usual to indicate the names of any co-operating authorities or individuals.

Objective of study: What do you want to achieve? Indicate the global problem, and the specific area chosen for study; say what you are hoping to achieve from your study – i.e. what are the objectives of the study? Attempt to formulate one or more specific research questions or a hypothesis if applicable.

Why this research: Succinct. What will this add to your practice, your profession’s or healthcare’s understanding of the area? Justify why you want to do this, what is your interest in the subject. Remember this should reflect your programme’s philosophy.

Related research: Succinct. Identify any work in this field/allied work that your study perhaps builds on or is related to. Show how your study is linked or develops from it. Say whether this study is original or replication of some other study (see note 'e' in Section 'Choosing A Topic' above). If it is a review then ensure you have searched Cochrane etc. to check no one has done your review before.

THIS IS NOT JUST A LIST OF REFERENCES.

Background literature: Some key areas need to be succinctly identified to give background to your work. (If it is a review then ensure you have searched Cochrane etc. to check no one has done your review before).This section should include not only empirical evidence but may refer to a Research Methodology texts too. This helps substantiate your next section.

Research methodology: This is the largest section BUT it needs to be a concise paragraph but show you understand if your work is exploratory, descriptive or explanatory such that it identifies your methodological approach as well as what you plan to do. INCLUDE PROPOSED DATA ANALYSIS – what sort of data are you intending to collect and linked with your objective and methodology how you will analyse it

150

Time, budget and cost: Very brief here - a sentence . ( A full timetable will be asked for with your full proposal). Make sure you consider your mode of study here. This is just so you are aware of issues around data collection, cost-of research materials e.g. paper for questionnaires etc. Flag up any specific time constraints such as a group of students only being available on a specific day

Pilot study: You should consider the need for a pilot study as a test of the feasibility, validity etc. of your intended research if applicable. Show how this links with previous sections. Note library based studies may well require a pilot study.

If you use references in any sections you must include them within the side A4

Your Outline Proposal is Reviewed

Students outline proposals are reviewed by the supervisors group and if acceptable you will receive a letter from the Module tutor identifying any points to work on and your supervisor’s name and contact details. You will work up your Full proposal now with your supervisor

If not successful you may be asked to resubmit in a very short period of time or to rethink and this may mean you will have to move to another RUN.

There is also a flow chart in the module folder on the KLE in the information section that illustrates these processes.

The Full Proposal and SPEC

Students will be required to submit this on a standard form available on the KLE which mirrors the forms often used in External Ethics review so should this be required the process is more stream lined. The form MUST be signed by both the student and the supervisor. The information below is to help you as you fill in the form, follow the section headings on the form.

Any included Background Literature Review must outline the main issues, concepts or theories involved and be critical

The Research methodology must give detail for some or all of the following, as appropriate to your particular topic:

i) theoretical perspective; ii) sampling techniques; nature of subjects, optimal numbers needed for adequate

results – how you are establishing these, controls etc; or specify databases, dates etc.

iii) context of research; facilities or equipment needed, exact site in which research is to be undertaken.

iv) design; methods of selection of subjects or empirical papers, variables, methods of data collection, anticipated problems not under researcher's control.

v) analysis; all procedures that will be used for analysing and synthesizing the data, statistical test(s) and quality tools that may be used (if appropriate).

vii) ethical factors; what problems might exist if you intend using human subjects? Consider if a submission to an ethical review committee is necessary. What form of consent will be used? Is permission needed to use questionnaires? Do you need managers, parents permission etc.

viii) The pilot study if applicable as a test of the feasibility, validity etc. of your intended research – give sufficient details of what this will involve.

151

What is important is to consider this as a template for the dissertation, the greater the quality of the full proposal then the greater your understanding and ability to operationalise it will be once you have approval from the examination board and ethics if applicable.

For ALL studies

A timetable of work must be attached – see end of handbook for examples and a

template

In addition to the form you must also submit to the Student Project Ethics Committee – see section later on submission

The supervisor by signing off the Full proposal and SPEC documentation shows they are happy for the student’s proposal to go forward for formal approval.

A supervisor may choose not to support the SPEC submission and advise the student not to submit at this point.This would then also be referred to the module tutor.

Submision Details

The Outline Proposal

The Outline Proposal should be on one side of A4 paper only, using a font size of 10 or 11. Appropriate headings should be utilized. Submitted via email** to the module tutor by 1pm on the deadline date.There is no need to leave a line spacing between sections.

The Full Proposal, SPEC form and Checklist

The Full Proposal should be submitted on the relevant form and should have all the relevant attachments. This is submitted as words document to the module utor by the agreed date and time

**Submission may be via the KLE for AY16/17 module tutor will confirm method.

N.B. These are formative stages to help you prepare for the dissertation. It is your

responsibility to meet the deadlines; if you miss these deadlines or work is referred

back you may miss the next supervisors’ meeting, external review and SPEC meeting.

This may delay your progression and even time bar you from completing the

dissertation stage.

Very important note:

There is a standard non-refundable charge of £200 if you are required to resubmit your dissertation - known as the ‘PGTDissertation Resubmission Fee’ .

Maximum time allowed is 10 months.

12.12 Ethical Considerations and Process

The Topic

It is important that the School is able to exercise some scrutiny over the research that is carried out under its aegis, and this includes all student research projects. Whatever the topic of your research, you will automatically need to submit in some form to the School Research Ethics Committee (SPEC) for approval.

152

VERY IMPORTANT

Point 11.5 of Regulation 8 Section 1.5 states ‘Student projects which involve the participation of human subjects must not be undertaken without the prior approval of a School Student Project Ethics Committee (or another Ethics Committee recognised for this purpose by the relevant School)’. The implications for students who do not obtain ethical approval are as follows:

Any offence that is deemed to be major will be automatically referred to the Appeals, Complaints and Conduct Manager to be dealt with via Academic Misconduct Panel and the appropriate penalty imposed.

Any offence that is deemed to be minor will be dealt with via the School Student Project Ethics Committee and an appropriate penalty imposed at School level

Examples of penalties for minor offences include:

Cap in marks for the relevant module

10% reduction in the marks for the relevant module

Failure of the module

If research involves human subjects recruited and studied through, the context of health care i.e. patients/users of healthcare services, that study proposal would be required to be submitted via the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) ­ see http://www.nres.nhs.uk/ via the relevant Trust or Primary Care Group, as well as to SPEC. It is also a requirement that such studies are reviewed by an independent assessor appointed by the University Ethics Committee. Some research e.g. involving NHS staff may be exempt from this requirement. Any researcher in the School of Health and Rehabilitation must obtain SPEC approval PRIOR to approaching any outside organisation.

N.B. you must not collect any data until you have received written evidence that you

have been granted ethical approval for your study.

You must not approach any individuals/external bodies/organisations without the

prior approval of your supervisor and spec.

The Student Project Ethics Committee (SPEC) Process

Applications to SPEC

The date(s) for submission to the SPEC will be published on the KLE (KLE/Learning/SHAR Student Project Ethics Committee). Several SPEC meetings are held from May to January. Usually, deadlines to submit applications to these meeting are two weeks before the meeting date – see the KLE for specific dates.

You are required to submit:

ONE electronic pdf file* of all components of the submission via the deadline(s) published on the KLE.

For library based studies, this should include your research proposal and completion of the online SPEC submission form (this can be found in the submission folder).

153

For all other studies, this should include your SPEC application form completed in detail and submitted with all the appropriate appendices for your study design, and completion of the online SPEC submission form (this can be found in the submission folder).

To submit via the KLE go to:

For Library based studies: KLE/Learning/SHAR Student Project Ethics Committee/Library based studies/Submit your Notification

For all other studies: KLE/Learning/SHAR Student Project Ethics Committee/SUBMIT your application/Full submission

*All documents must be submitted as one pdf document (please see the SHAR SPEC webpages for a ‘how to’ instruction video).

Submissions must be made from your individual Keele University account.

Submission to SPEC must NOT be made without your supervisor’s approval, however

a signature is not required. Failure to seek your supervisor’s permission (and where

applicable, other group members permission) PRIOR to submitting an application to

SPEC will be considered a breach of academic and professional conduct and will

result in your referral to the Health and Conduct committee. We strongly advise you

to retain an email from your supervisor (and if applicable, group members) stating

their agreement for you to proceed with the submission.

SPEC Decision

The committee will review the application and provide one of the following outcomes:

a. Immediate approval

b. Chair’s action* (i.e. requiring minor amendments and subsequent

resubmission for SPEC Chair’s action)

c. Full re­submission^ (i.e. requiring major amendment or detail and a complete

resubmission)

*Those requiring the SPEC Chair’s action do not have to wait until the next scheduled SPEC meeting to submit their amended application form. See the box below for more information.

^Those requiring a complete resubmission are required to re­submit their applications to the SPEC as per the original instructions by the deadlines published for the SPEC meetings on the KLE.

ALL studies involving human participants must await formal ethical approval from

SPEC prior to starting any part of their experimental work (including recruitment).

Approval will only be granted when the committee are satisfied that the submission

complies with the current research governance framework:

(http://www.keele.ac.uk/researchsupport/researchgovernance/).

Minutes from the SPEC meeting will be available to your supervisor approximately 7 days after the committee meeting (at this time, feedback on your application, and where applicable, issues to address, will be made available to you via the KLE ­ return to your submission to view them). You should then liaise with your supervisor who will advise you of the outcome of your SPEC application and how to approach any necessary amendments.

154

SPEC

Decision What next?

Immediate

Approval Your study may proceed.

Chair’s Action Your study may not proceed. Please address the comments made by

SPEC reviewer.

Liaise with your supervisor regarding amendments required. Complete the

Chairs action approval form, HIGHLIGHT your amendments and

submit your revised application (including appendices) via the KLE

(KLE/Learning/SHAR Student Project Ethics Committee/SUBMIT your

application/Chair’s Action)

Full

Resubmission No approval, you may not proceed.

Liaise with your supervisor regarding amendments required. Re­submit

your new application (including appendices) to the appropriate

SPEC meeting (see KLE for meeting dates and deadlines for

submission).

It is the student's responsibility to contact their supervisor for feedback from SPEC. The most common outcome of all SPEC submissions is Chair’s action, therefore it is likely that you will have some amendments to make to your SPEC form and have to re­submit it before you can proceed with your project.

When your application has been approved your supervisor will receive a confirmation letter. We strongly recommend that you file this letter (or notification form for Library based studies) in a safe place. You will be required to include this in your dissertation as an appendix. This will act as evidence that your study received ethical approval (or for Library based studies, evidence that your study was registered with the School SPEC).

Procedures for Changing or Modifying Your Study

The ethical approval that you obtain relates only to the specific investigation and documentation that was included and detailed in the approved submission.

For changes to library based studies

If after full consultation with your supervisor, you decide, for whatever reason, to change your area of study or significantly modify your study, you will only need to notify the SPEC

If after full consultation with your supervisor you decide to change your study to one

involving human participants you will need to submit a full SPEC application form with all the appropriate appendices (See SHAR SPEC webpages on the KLE).

If after full consultation with your supervisor decide you to change your title you must complete and submit to SPEC an application to amend study form (see KLE SHAR SPEC webpages).

For changes to all other studies

155

For minor amendments to the study originally approved by SPEC, further ethical approval must be sought. An application to amend study form must be completed and submitted to SPEC with the relevant associated documentation. See SHAR SPEC webpages on the KLE.

However, if after full consultation with your supervisor, you decide, for whatever reason, to significantly change your area of study or design of your study after having received ethical approval, then you must complete and submit a new SPEC application for the new study.

Ethical Considerations and Guidance

Please see the SHAR SPEC webpages on the KLE for guidance documents, examples and templates for:

Participant information

Consent

Recruitment of research participants

Health Screening

Risk to the participant

Risk to the researcher

Data Anonymity, Confidentiality and Retention

Online questionnaires and consent

N.B. You must not collect any data until you have received written assurance that you have been given ethical approval to do so. You are not formally on the ‘dissertation’ and you must not collect any data until your dissertation proposal has been formally approved and you have received confirmation of this fact.

Approval letters for all types of study from SPEC (or any other ethics committee

MUST be appended in your final thesis) failure to do this will mean failure of the

module

Responsibility

It is the students responsibility to find out the dates of when the relevant External Ethics Committee sits and the requirements of the Committee e.g. numbers of copies of proposal, how soon before the Committee meeting they need to submit papers? etc. Be aware that some Committees may require you to discuss your proposal at the meeting. This also applies to R and D approval processes.

You should not submit a formal application to an External Ethics Committee without consulting your supervisor nor before SPEC approval.

N.B.Members of the university have a collective responsibility to protect the good name of the institution by subjecting their own research to searching ethical scrutiny. The university retains the right to intervene where there are reasonable grounds to believe that a project may fall short of agreed ethical norms.

156

12.13 Carrying Out Your Dissertation Project

Supervision

Having received your outline proposal the Dissertation Module Tutor will, in due course, allocate you a supervisor. Once you know who your supervisor is you should make early contact with him or her to discuss your proposal and to establish an agreed timetable for your project. You have a maximum of 15 hours supervision from the date you are allocated your supervisor to the date of submission.

N.B. Reading drafts, responding to emails ALL count within the 15 hours.

N.B.The responsibility for contacting your supervisor and making appointments is yours and you must use your Keele email address.

Many students want to know how often they should meet with their supervisor; this will vary from student to student and is something you should agree with your supervisor during your first meeting, you are, however, strongly advised to meet on a regular basis.

You will most benefit from your supervision if you go prepared.

Prior to meeting with your supervisor, think about what you would like to discuss. Notes, written questions or an outline plan of work all provide something on which you can focus, enabling you to make profitable use of your tutorial time. It is often benefit to send plans etc. in advance of the meeting so the time spent with the supervisor in discussion is maximised.

N.B Supervisors are quite within their right to terminate a supervisory session if it is

clear the student is not prepared.

A record of supervision must be kept you should agree with your supervisor on the format you wish to use. This record must include telephone, email and reading as well as face to face contact time. Both the supervisor and the student should have copies of supervisory meetings. It may also be useful for students to keep a research logbook/diary/workbook during the dissertation period this is for your personal use only. It is a good way of keeping all the information pertaining to the dissertation in one place, e.g. copies of the supervision diary, notes from workshops, papers you want to find, questions to ask supervisor etc.

This record of hours and discussion does not contribute to the final mark but the External Examiner may ask to see the dissertation supervisory records.

With regards to data analysis, both qualitative and quantitative, please note the

following:

a. Your named supervisor will discuss this with you as part of the supervisory process. b. If together you are unable to solve a problem or need further clarification on a data

issue the supervisor will approach another member of the School first BUT the Stastician within the School should be approached before consultation goes outside the

School. Students must not approach other members of staff or research students. c. On occasions it may be pertinent for both the supervisor and the student to go together

to see another member of staff BUT the supervisor will have arranged this.

d. The advice to be given should be in relation to the collection and analysis of data within the context of the dissertation.

It should not be concerned with: general statistics tuition; help with statistics assignments on taught research methods and statistics modules; advice on the use of software (this being a technician's role)

157

Also workshops are normally run in these areas e. If further advice is sought students with their supervisors should be able to identify

specific questions which have been thought through and formulated prior to attending, rather than vague or unspecific requests for help.

Good Practice for Supervisors and Students

Dissertation Supervisors will inform students if they are to be absent from the University for more than 7 working days.

Students should also inform Dissertation Supervisors if they are to be absent for more than 7 working days.

Dissertation Supervisors will acknowledge students emails, letters, telephone calls and written work, within 7 working days.

Please note the actual feedback on wriiten work may be longer than 7 days but this should be identified in the acknowledgement

Please note that occasionally exceptional circumstances beyond our control may prevent staff/students achieving this 7-day notice. However wherever possible contact should be made via a third party.

Arrange and cancel appointments in good time

If sending work prior to a tutorial keep to the agreed deadline.

Supervisor and student each have a copy of the diary sheets.

Research Conduct

This really goes without saying – but it is essential that the normal conventions of politeness, respect for people's privacy and general civility are maintained at all times if the study involves interaction with the public, this includes campus staff and students. You should endeavour to put people at their ease, keep appointments; gain their consent and explain your actions (in the context of the research) to increase the likelihood of co-operation and minimise the chances of misunderstanding and distress occurring. If in doubt about how to handle a particular situation seek the guidance of your supervisor.

If your supervisor feels that your behaviour as a student is not what is expected of you at this stage for example; inappropriate response to feedback, failure to turn up for appointments, consistenly attend tutorials ill prepared or feels that the quality of your work may threaten a positive outcome of this stage; this will be made known to you and a written record made. Additionally the Dissertation Module Tutor will be informed (and if appropriate the Director of Postgraduate Studies) and they will make a decision as to the action to be taken.

12.14 Written Materials and Supervision

In addition to the items mentioned in the above paragraph you will also be producing material, which your supervisor may read, review or discuss. This is referred to as "informal" writing and includes:

The Full Proposal (including drafts)

Preliminary drafts of chapters

158

Possibly transcripts of interviews

Preliminary Draft of the Dissertation

Students are strongly encouraged to get their supervisor to read, criticise and advise on preliminary drafts of parts of your dissertation however it is important that you note the following:

Supervisors do not expect to feedback on a piece of written work normally more than once, this applies to all chapters, abstracts, results etc.

A supervisor is quite within their right to refuse to see any further drafts.

They will NOT CORRECT ALL grammar, style, referencing mistakes in your work they will identify these on a section of your work and expect you to review all your wriiten work in the light of these comments.

Referencing etc. is exactly the same as the coursework for the diploma so revisit your handbook!

SUPERVISORS WILL NOT READ OR FEEDBACK ON THE DISCUSSION OR CONCLUSION CHAPTERS AT ALL as these chapters are how students really show their ability to analyse and theorise about their work and present it academically.

Your supervisor is there to provide advice and guidance but not to do the work for you! You will find that your supervisor will probably give you some general advice on improving the dissertation; he or she will not necessarily indicate each and every shortcoming.

12.15 The Dissertation

This should consist of some, or all, of the following sections. Following consultation with your supervisor, it may be decided that a slightly different format may be more appropriate to your study. For example, the format for a study that has collected predominantly quantitative data may differ from that of a study of largely qualitative data. Also, if you are doing a theoretical, rather than an empirical, dissertation, you should discuss the appropriate format with your supervisor.

Preliminary Material i. Declaration of own work ii. Title page iii. Abstract iv. Contents v. Acknowledgements

Main Section vi. Introduction vii. Background Literature viii. Methodology ix. Results x. Discussions and conclusions

Reference Materials xi. References cited xii. Appendices xiii. Agreement of Authorship

Some General Points to Note

159

The proportion of the whole, which each section occupies, obviously depends on numerous factors, depending on the nature of your particular dissertation.

A very general guide for empirical work might however be:

Introduction 10% of the words Background Literature 25% of the words Methodology 20% of the words Results 15% of the words Discussion and conclusions 30% of the words

A very general guide for libarary based work might however be: Introduction 10% of the words Background Literature 20% of the words Methodology 10% of the words (Note this section will include the ‘results’ of

searches) Review (discussion) 40% of the words Conclusions 10% of the words

The introduction can form part of the Backgound Literature Chapter or can be a chapter in its own right as can the discussion and conclusion.

It is often convenient to refer to parts of the dissertation as chapters (the introduction would be Chapter 1 for example), and to number major subdivisions, and even individual paragraphs of each chapter. If you choose to do this please use the decimal system (e.g. 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.2.1, 2.1.1, etc.) since it is by far the easiest to follow (many word-processing programmes will number sections for your automatically). Do not forget to number each page in addition.

Please do not overuse footnotes since their use often causes difficulties, and tends to detract from the text's readability, and if you are using them do so correctly.They are not a measn of getting round the wordcount

Terms to be abbreviated should be written out in full on the first occasion they are mentioned, with the abbreviation in brackets. Thereafter, the abbreviation alone can be used. It should not be punctuated (i.e. SLE, rather than S.L.E.). If you are using a substantial number of abbreviations it might be useful to include in the preliminary material an abbreviations page.

Units should be expressed according to the Système International d'Unités (SI system).

To Ensure the Final Product is Effectively Your Own

You Should Ask Yourself the Following Questions:

a. Can I reproduce the concepts, arguments, calculations and conclusions independently and without further help in this or any future work of a similar nature?

b. Can I justify my choice of approach by reference to theory or concepts from recognised authorities? Could I explain why I consider it most appropriate or relevant to the matter under discussion in either an oral examination or in future work?

c. Have I given full attribution to the sources and the authority on which I am relying?

160

Everyone is Fallible!

For example, it is dangerous to trust other people's calculations if you cannot reproduce them on your own. Similarly a conclusion reached by someone else may not be the logical outcome of your line of argument. Genuine mistakes can be made but they should emanate from your own misunderstanding, not that of others.

Sources

Take nothing on trust unless you quote its source. Try to ascertain that the source is accepted within the subject - has it appeared in your lecture programme and wider reading? The decision to include information from whatever source is yours alone. You should be able to judge the dividing line if you remember that if you do not understand something you should not include it. If in doubt ask your supervisor initially or the Dissertation Module Tutor, both about specific points of difficulty relating to content and the general area of plagiarism.

Suspicious Circumstances

Finally if several students reproduce the same error, conceptually or factually, suspicions are bound to be aroused. If a student’s style changes in the thesis or is significantly different from their taught work suspicions are bound to be aroused. There may be no illegal intention but even errors can lead to an investigation. However if you follow these guidelines and seek advice any such problems can be avoided. We do use Turnitin.

N.B. You may be required to attend a Viva Voce.

12.16 Format and Content of the Dissertation

Title

The title should describe the content of the report accurately and concisely.

Title Page

The title page should give the following information in the order listed:

a. The full title of the dissertation (and the subtitle if any);

b. The total number of volumes if more than one and the number of the particular volume;

c. The full name of the author;

d. The form of words given in Section 12.19.1.

Abstract

About 300 words presenting the subject of the research, the research methods used and the main findings. The abstract should not include references. It should be typed single spaced and not more than one side of A4 in length.

Contents

This lists in sequence, with page numbering, all relevant subdivisions of the report, including the title of chapters, sections and subsections, any appendices and the list of references. If the dissertation comprises more than one volume, contents of the whole report shall be shown in the first volume and the contents of subsequent volumes in a separate contents list in the appropriate volumes.

161

The word count should be at the bottom of this page.

Acknowledgements

Give mention to anyone who has been of specific help to you in the preparation of your dissertation.

Introduction

The purpose of this section is to present the background to, and the rationale for, your work. It should enable the reader, both expert and non-expert, to understand why your investigation was felt to be worth doing. The introduction should conclude with a clear statement of the specific objectives of the dissertation.

Backgound Literature (Sometimes called a Literature Review Chapter)

In order to evaluate your proposals, it is necessary that they be viewed in the context of previous work. This section should involve a review of recent (and not so recent but relevant) literature. Reviewing the literature involves much more than describing previous research – it is essential that you present a critical analysis of the literature.

See section 6 for full details on the use of references.

a. References in the text should be quoted by the name and date only.

e.g.This investigation (Borroughs, 1989) indicated...

e.g.'...showed considerable variability in respondents' views (Bielawski et al, 1979 p14)

e.g.The recent work of Saunders & Jones (1974) has...

b. Never copy word for word from any source without making it perfectly clear that you have done so. This is achieved by putting the passage between quotation marks and referencing the source. All direct quotations, diagrams etc must be referenced correctly.

c. The use of secondary sources is generally discouraged; however, if they are used it is imperative to make it made clear that recourse has been made to the original; e.g. (Johnston & Matlock, cited in Brown, 1984 p56).

d. You may need to make a direct quotation within your work. Refer to the section on direct quotations in this handbook. The quotation should be followed by the appropriate reference.

e. A separate bibliography (i.e. books consulted but not referenced) is not required.

Methodology

This should comprise:

a. A precise statement of the scope and aims of the investigation, to include the hypothesis to be tested, or the research question(s) to explored;

b. A description of the procedures employed, together with a discussion of the general methodological considerations underlying their choice;

c. Any inclusion and exclusion criteria The subjects or types of empirical papers used and any inclusion and exclusion criteria;

162

d. Any instrumentation used and or developed, and any piloting or calibration (copies of questionnaires, interview schedules, quality tools for MSRs: long descriptions of apparatus etc. may be included in the appendices);

e. The means of data collection and a description of all data analyses techniques employed;

f. How rigour is achieved;

g. Ethical considerations;

Results

Straightforward reporting of the outcome of your investigations. As a general rule, you should not comment on, or discuss, your data; simply present it, unembellished by opinion, for scrutiny. You can however offer clarification of your results but at this point it is not usual to offer an interpretation. Note that the past tense is normally used in presenting your results.

These data may be in the form of written description, quotations, tables, histograms, graphs, diagrams, standard deviations etc. In some cases raw data, particularly if extensive, ought perhaps to be excluded from the results and appear in an appendix.

You should choose methods of presenting your results which demonstrate them to their best advantage. All figures, tables and diagrams ought to have titles, explanatory captions and labelling where necessary, and be numbered in sequence. All figures, tables and diagrams should, as far as possible, be self-explanatory without extensive reference to the text. When information or data are presented in tables, figures, and diagrams, the text should enlarge upon, but not repeat, these data.

Avoid too much use of colour, it is often much clearer to use black and white in tables, figures, diagrams and photographs. Photographs etc. can be scanned or high quality photocopied, if needs they can be fastened onto manuscript pages using a proprietary photographic adhesive. Lettering on diagrams, graphs etc. should preferably be in typescript.

When presenting quotations from interviews, ensure that different quotations from the same respondent can be identified and therefore correlated. If you have to use extensive quotations these should be separated from the main text by indenting at the left and right margins and by single spacing the text.

N.B.If you are presenting qualitative data, in the form of extensive quotations from interviews etc, it may not be feasible to separate the presentation of data from its analysis in the way suggested above. You may wish to comment on your data as you present them – this is wholly appropriate. If you feel you are in such a situation, discuss this with your supervisor, before beginning your write up.

Discussion

In this section you give your assessment of the results, say what they mean, and relate them to any points you made in the introduction and the background literature you presented. Any reservations you may have about your findings should be made clear; be honest and give any technical difficulties you had with the collection of your data, and discuss any methodological shortcomings of your work.

163

Finish your discussion with the overall conclusions you have reached from your research, and indicate the directions in which further work could be attempted. A subsection can be included entitled 'Suggestions for further research'.

Appendices

These should contain a record of the key data collected, and perhaps detailed working of any statistical tests used or processes of article elimination for reviews or analysis stages for qualitative data, in fact anything that is relevant but which would be intrusive elsewhere.

Your raw data should be on your USB/CD

N.B. Discuss your specific presentation format with your supervisor

12.17 Notes for Guidance on the Preparation of Dissertations

The Cost of Preparing the Dissertation

The typing and binding costs will need to be considered in your budget. Including cost linked to colour printing of illustrations, graphs etc. (see previous comments re: use of colour).

Allocation of Time

It would be wise to set aside a significant period of time simply for the writing of the dissertation. This part of this stage almost invariably involves much more time and effort than is anticipated. Remember to leave adequate time for checking and proof reading, and a further allocation of time for any final alterations or corrections.

Format

Consult your supervisor on the precise format you should follow. You should also establish with your supervisor which are likely to be the most important sections (for assessment purposes) of your particular dissertation. Do this before you invest a lot of time in its preparation.

N.B. The format you adopt should reflect your chosen methodology and will differ

within quantitative and qualitative approaches and empirical and non empirical

reviews.

The Writing

The report should be written in clear, concise English; considerable effort should be devoted to this end. You should aim for concision and quality in your writing.

You will probably find it necessary to write 2 or 3 drafts, critically examining them, correcting, and shortening if necessary, in an attempt to arrive at a high quality, readable final version.

a. Avoid terminology which may give offence on grounds of ethnocentricity or sexism. Bear in mind that gender-specific terminology often conveys stereotypes, and that women do not necessarily feel themselves included in male pronouns (and vice versa). Thus, instead of 'the doctor may discharge his professional duty by ....', say 'doctors may discharge their professional duty by ...' or 'the doctor may discharge his or her professional duty by....'. Similarly, terms such as 'layman', 'manpower', 'mankind' and 'ambulancemen' can be replaced with 'lay person', 'staffing', 'humanity' and 'ambulance officers', respectively.

b. In biological sciences and experimental psychology it is often customary to write reports in the third person (e.g. 'the researcher took readings at hourly intervals'), whereas the first person is often favoured in sociological research (e.g. 'during my interviews with

164

respondents, I often found that ....'). Discuss with your supervisor which is appropriate for our own project.

c. Identify certain key terminology that is likely to occur repeatedly throughout your report. Check whether each term is potentially ambiguous, and if so ensure that you have clarified the definition which you intend to follow.

Frequent use of a dictionary will prevent many errors in respect of frequently misused words, words whose meaning changes with different spellings, or those which have both general and more specific technical meaning.

The following words, for example, are not synonyms:

affect effect disinterested uninterested fortunate fortuitous inter- intra- experimentation research population sample variance variability discrete discreet validity reliability indeterminate indeterminable imply infer

12.18 Preparing Your Dissertation for Submission

You must submit on or before the submission deadline.

You should regard this as the date beyond which your Project may not be accepted, or eligible, for consideration by the Examination Board. You should submit the items required to the School Office, before 1.00pm, and NOT to your Supervisor.

Each student must submit two bound copies of their dissertation. One of these will be retained by the University and lodged in the School. The other copy will be returned to the student after assessment.

The student must also submit the full dissertation on disc or USB stick; this must

include all the raw data.

The student must also fill out a declaration of student’s own work and bind this in the

dissertation on the KLE.

The student must also submit an Agreement of Authorship and bind this in the

dissertation on the KLE.

Presentation of Dissertation

Students must have their report typed or word processed.

Font either Times New Roman 12 or Arial 10.

The Project must be typed on A4 sized paper with a left-hand margin of not less than 2.5 cm and not more than 3.5 cm.

165

This also applies to pages containing diagrams, tables etc.

The typescript must be 1.5 line spaced and on one side only.

The length of the project is as specified in your course handbook.

The title page of the report should consist of:

The title

Name of author

A statement along the following lines:

"A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of MSc/MRes in.................., in

Faculty of Health, Keele University, Year ……..”

One copy must be bound as follows:

Hardback Binding

Pages Sewn

Dark Blue Buckram, Arbelave 541

Gold Lettering

Cover: Title, Name, Degree and Year

Spine: Name, Degree and Year (up spine)

The second copy can be either bound as above or must be either Linen, Velo or Tape, or spinal bound as a minimum requirement between card covers.

Binding: it is the students responsibility to find a place that can bind the work as required and are advised to build this into their timetable. The less time given to binding can increase the expense.

Publication

The aim of work at this level is to be of good academic standard.

If after the project is marked and been to an Examination Board you may wish to discuss with your supervisor the possibility of publication.

If you do go onto publish it is best if you can agree a basis for such work early on in the process. Please do not hesitate to contact your supervisor for advice.

Publication and the dissemination of your findings are part of the research process and part of your supervisor's role is to help you to do this.

N.B. Publication should only be discussed after the dissertation has been

assessed.

166

Agreement of Authorship

It is usual for work published from a dissertation submitted as part fulfilment of a masters degree to be jointly authored by the student and the supervisor. The student is normally the first author.

The form on the next page should be signed by the student and supervisor and bound in the dissertation report. The agreement between students and supervisors regarding authorship on any publication or oral presentation resulting from the Dissertation will normally be based on the definition at the top of the form.

Problems

If there are problems concerning any aspect of the dissertation, contact your supervisor or the Dissertation Module Tutor.

Good luck and enjoy researching!

167

Authorship

All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship. The order of Authorship should be a joint decision of 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. Participation solely in 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 to its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author.

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 1991, New England Journal of

Medicine, 324: 428-428.

Note: to qualify for authorship all authors must appove the final version of the publication.

There is need therefore for all authors to remain in contact until the final version has been

accepted for publication.

We the undersigned agree to the terms, as detailed above.

Student…………………………………………………………

Supervisor……………………………………………………..

Date……………………………………………………………..

This agreement is adapted from Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh

This must be bound into the dissertation

168

12.19 Suggested References

American Psychological Association 1994 Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th edn. American Psychological Association, Washington

Aveyard H 2010 Doing a literature review in Health and Social Care. 2nd edn. Open University Press,Berkshire

Barnanrd S, Hartigan G 1998 Clinical Audit in Physiotherapy. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford

Barlow DH, Hersen M 1984 Single case experimental design: strategies for studying behavior change, 2nd edn. Pergamon Press, Oxford

Field A 2005 Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, London

Fink A 2014 Conducting research literature reviews: from paper to the Internet, 4th edn. Sage Publications, London

Foster JJ 2001 Data analysis using SPSS for Windows: A beginners guide (New Edition: Versions 8 – 10). Sage Publications, London

Healthcare Quality Improvement partnership (HQIP) undated. A guide for Clinicla Audit, Research and Service review http://www.hqip.org.uk/assets/Downloads/Audit-Research-Service-Evaluation.pdf

Hicks CM 2004 Research for clinical therapists: applied project design and analysis, 4th edn. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh

Morse JM, Richards L 2002 Read me first for a users guide to qualitative methods. Sage Publications, London

Oliver P 2003 The student’s guide to research ethics. Open University Press, Maidenhead

Oppenheim AN 1992 Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. Pinter Publications, London

Richards T 2002 An intellectual history of NUD*IST and NVivo. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 5(3): 199-214

Rudestam KE, Newton RR 2001 Surviving your dissertation. A comprehensive guide to content and process. 2nd ed. Sage Publications, London

Silverman D 2000 Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. Sage Publications, London

Sim J, Wright C 2000 Research in Health Care: concepts, designs and methods. Nelson Thornes, Cheltenham

Thomas SA 2000 How to write health sciences papers, dissertations and theses. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh

169

12.20 Criteria for the Assessment of Level 7 Dissertations

Module Pass Mark is ≥ 50%

0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100

Relevance of

literature/material

to the question or

task

Irrelevant Irrelevant or inappropriate. with major errors and omissions

Limited with major errors and omissions, undiscriminating

Largely relevant, but limited or undiscriminating

Relevant but possibly limited or undiscriminating

Relevant and judicious.

Very relevant and judicious. Utilises diverse sources

Very relevant and judicious. Consistently utilises diverse sources

Very relevant and judicious. Consistently utilises diverse sources

Grasp of key

concepts and

theories and an

ability to

synthesise cognate

theoretical and/or

empirical material

including if

appropriate links

between theory and

practice made

Grasp of concepts and theoretical perspectives fundamentally wrong or deficient and irrelevant. Absent or inappropriate links

Grasp of key concepts and theoretical perspectives very poor or fundamentally wrong as well as very limited range. Links inappropriate, insufficient or absent

Grasp of key concepts and theoretical perspectives poor and/or fragmentary and a limited range considered. Generally inappropriate and /or insufficient links made

Grasp and relevance of the range of concepts and theoretical perspectives limited. Therefore tendency towards exposition and not synthesis Generally insufficient links made

Competent grasp in some key aspects only; which therefore impacts on an ability to synthesize a range of cognate theoretical and/or empirical material.

Good grasp and synthesis of a range of cognate theoretical and/or empirical material. Occasionally imaginative

Very good grasp and synthesis of a range of cognate theoretical and/or empirical material and imaginative

Excellent grasp and synthesis of a range of cognate theoretical and/or empirical material and imaginative

Exceptional grasp and synthesis of a range of cognate theoretical and/or empirical material and imaginative

Critical Analysis None Descriptive

Descriptive with very little or no analysis and appraisal

Descriptive with little analysis and appraisal

Limited with a tendency towards exposition with little analysis and appraisal

Evidence of a critical approach including methodological critique of empirical literature, where appropriate.

A good level of critical analysis including methodological critique of empirical literature where appropriate.

A very good level of critical analysis including methodological critique of empirical literature where appropriate.

Excellent critical analysis including methodological critique of empirical literature where appropriate.

Exceptional critical analysis including methodological critique of empirical literature where appropriate.

Level of

argumentation

None. Descriptive Covers too many points; no depth

Little or None. Descriptive Covers too many points; no depth

Poor. Failure to address more than one side of an argument, and to consider both strengths and weaknesses of a theory. Covers too many points; no depth

Limited or modest. Tendency not to address more than one side of an argument, nor to consider both strengths and weaknesses of a theory. Covers too many points; no depth

Competent but possibly handled unimaginatively Possibly unable or unwilling to handle more than one side of an argument, nor to consider both strengths and weaknesses of a theory.

Mainly rigorous, often handled in a creative way. Evidence of skill in evaluating more than one side of an argument and considering both strengths and weaknesses of a theory.

Rigorous, handled in a highly creative way. High degree of skill in evaluating more than one side of an argument and considering both strengths and weaknesses of a theory.

Highly rigorous handled in a highly creative way. Excellent degree of skill in evaluating a theory(ies)

Highly rigorous consistently handled in a highly creative way. Exceptional degree of skill in evaluating a theory(ies)

170

0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100

Stylistic

accomplishment

and use of English

Very Poor with ambiguity and/or lack of clarity

Very poor with ambiguity and/or lack of clarity which frequently impacts on sense

Poor with ambiguity and/or lack of clarity which frequently impacts on sense

Little: possibly some areas of ambiguity and/or lack of clarity occasionally impacts on sense.

Satisfactory with Ideas expressed with a reasonable degree of clarity

Good with ideas expressed with a good degree of clarity

Very good with Ideas expressed with a very good degree of clarity.

Excellent

Exceptional

Presentation of

references

Unacceptable

Unacceptable Major and minor errors and omissions in text and list

Mostly minor errors and omissions in text and list

Minor errors and omissions in text and list

Minor errors and omissions and few in number in text and list

No errors and omissions in text and list

No errors and omissions in text and list

No errors and omissions in text and list

Overall Clear signs of an inability to make the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study.

Clear signs of an inability to make the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study.

Fails to meet a significant number of the criteria in the 40-50 band; clear signs of an inability to make the transition from undergraduate to postgraduate study.

Inadequate design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Absent or insufficient theoretical-framework and/or methodological shortcomings which undermine the coherence of the project. Poor standard of presentation of data, and use of English. A dissertation of this standard will normally represent a research project which is significantly flawed in terms of conception and/or execution.

An acceptable level of skill in the design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Competent work, which may be somewhat lacking in terms of a sound theoretical-framework and may contain some methodological shortcomings. An acceptable standard of presentation of data, and use of English. A dissertation of this standard will normally represent a research project which is modest in terms of conception and execution.

A high level of skill in the design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Imaginative and theoretically-informed work, A high standard of presentation of data, and use of English. No substantial errors, but some minor shortcomings in one or more areas. A dissertation of this standard will normally represent a challenging research project. The student is capable of conducting research, with guidance.

A very high level of skill in the design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Imaginative and theoretically-informed work. A very high standard of presentation of data, and use of English. Negligible errors, if any. A dissertation of this standard will normally represent a challenging and ambitious research project. The student is clearly capable of conducting research with guidance.

A excellent level of skill in the design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Satisfies all the criteria in the 70-79 band to an excellent degree, representing excellent academic and intellectual accomplishment. Excellent evidence of ability to conduct research independently.

Work representing original, critical thinking; superlative academic accomplishment in the design, execution and analysis of the chosen research. Unlikely the work could be bettered in the time available. Unmistakable evidence of ability to conduct research independently.

171

Masters Dissertation in Faculty of Health

Programme: _____________________________________________________

Dissertation title ___________________________________________________

STUDENT Name and Number.______________________

Comments: (continue over page if necessary)

Summary:

Has plagiarism/bad practice been identified? Y/N (delete appropriately)

Action to be taken:

Marker

Mark: Date:

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A FEEDBACK SHEET

172

Proposed Timetable for Research Two Examples START

May June July August September Complete Lit Review

Draft, methods chapter

Pilot Study

Collect Data Draft, literature chapter

Analyse Data Draft,results chapter

Writing Up Discussion; Abstract; Reference List

Proof reading Binding Completion

May June July August September Ocotber November December January

February

Library Searches Draft, methods chapter

Pilot Study Using tool

Analyse Data Draft, Literature chapter

Writing up Framework for Review Abstract; Reference List

Proof reading Binding Completion

Full Time Student Experimental Study

Modular Student Modified Systematic Review

173

Student’s Proposed Timetable for Research

START

Month