✍️ Get Writing Help

PSY_5_ERM Psychological Research Methods 3 Assessment Brief | LSBU

/ Uncategorized / By

PSY_5_ERM Psychological Research Methods 3 Assessment Brief | LSBU

PSY_5_ERM Assessment Brief

Assessment Brief	Read this assessment brief carefully, it tells you how you are going to be assessed, how to submit your assessment on-time, how your work will be marked and how you’ll receive your marks and feedback.
Module Title/Code	Psychological Research Methods 3 / PSY_5_ERM
Type of Assessment	Research methods report
Assessment Description	The coursework for this module involves designing, executing, analysing and reporting a factorial experiment that you carry out on the topic of helping behaviour. You will start working on this in your week 2 seminar, where you will receive further instructions (see the additional coursework document on Moodle in the coursework folder). You are expected to carry out some of the coursework activities outside of class. You will be given the opportunity to receive feedback on a partial draft (title, introduction, methods, references). You will be working as part of a group for the design and execution (data collection) of the experiment but you are expected to analyse and write up your report independently.
Word Limits and Weighting	2000 words 40% of total module mark (to be combined with 60% for the exam in January)

Bonuses and Penalties	Word limit penalties Word counts of 1 word up to 10% over the word limit will incur a penalty of a reduction of one categorical mark. Word counts greater than 10% over the word limit will incur a penalty of a reduction of two categorical marks. Referencing bonus and penalties Level 5: A referencing penalty of one categorical mark will be applied for two or more of the following referencing errors: Most references cited in text not in correct format Significant lack of correspondence between cited references and the reference list Poorly presented reference list e.g. not in APA style (with some latitude about commas, italics etc.), not in alphabetical order
Submission Method	Submit online via Moodle for this module
Presentation	Work must be referenced, and a reference section included (APA referencing unless advised otherwise). See your Library Subject Guide for referencing guidance and here for the library guide to using APA referencing for LSBU students Work must be submitted as a word document
Deadline	The deadline is published on Moodle
Marking and Feedback	Your work will be marked using the marking criteria below. Feedback will be provided on Grademark on the extent to which you have met the marking criteria. Marks and feedback will be available 15 working days after the deadline (excluding Bank Holidays and university closure days).
Regulations	Make sure you understand the University Regulations on expected academic practice and academic misconduct. Note in particular: § Your work must be your own. Markers will be attentive to both the plausibility of the sources provided as well as the consistency and approach to the writing of the work. Simply, if you do the research and reading, and then write it up on your own, giving the reference to sources, you will approach the work in the appropriate way and will not give markers reason to question the authenticity of the work. § All quotations must be credited and properly referenced. Paraphrasing is still regarded as plagiarism if you fail to acknowledge the source for the ideas being expressed. TURNITIN: When you upload your work to the Moodle site it will be checked by anti-plagiarism software.
Marking criteria LSBU marking criteria have been developed to help tutors give you clear and helpful feedback on your work. They will be applied to your work to help you understand what you have accomplished, how any mark given was arrived at, and how you can improve your work in future. Full details are available at the end of this document	Standard University Criteria	Operationalised Criteria for this Assessment
	Research	Systematic identification and use of academic and relevant resources
	Subject Knowledge	Understanding and application of subject knowledge.
	Critical Analysis	Analysis and interpretation of sources, literature and/or results. Structuring of issues/debates.
	Communication and Presentation	Clear intention in communication. Audience needs are predicted and met. Presentation format is used skilfully. Work is well structured.
	Data literacy	Competence in working ethically with data including data analysis, interpretation, and representation
Learning Outcomes This assessment will fully or partially assess the learning outcomes for this module	At the end of the module, students will be expected to be able to: Knowledge and understanding · Select appropriate quantitative research methods and related analyses to answer a research question. Communication · Be able to write research reports of increasing complexity. Critical thinking · Be able to compare methods and techniques, and be able to compute, manipulate, interpret and evaluate numerical data. Employability · Be able to use numerical data appropriately.
BPS core domains taught/developed	Research Methods, Individual Differences, Conceptual and Historical Issues in Psychology, Social Psychology
BPS core domains assessed	Research Methods, Conceptual and Historical Issues in Psychology
Reading	· Reading Lists Online on Moodle provide additional textbooks that you can consult
Assessment support/ Formative assessment	Weekly seminars with exercises Weekly Moodle quizzes and reviews Coursework support: Seminars Lectures Results template Feedback on formative submission of partial draft Exam support: Previous exam papers Week 12 lecture Week 12 seminar (mock)
FAQs	Question		Answer
	See FAQ document on Moodle and Q&As posted in the coursework forum		See FAQ document on Moodle and Q&As posted in the coursework forum

PSY_5_ERM Standard Marking Criteria

Criteria
	Feed for ward comments
	100-80%	79-70%	69-60%	59-50%	49-40%	39-30%	29-0%
Research Systematic identification and use of academic and relevant resources	Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Ability to draw on own research and that of others.	Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Some autonomous research.	Wide range of relevant sources identified and used. Very little guidance needed.	A range of sources identified and used. Limited guidance needed.	Limited research identified and used. Some guidance needed to complete research tasks.	Some evidence of research but insufficient amount. Needs support to develop research skills.	Little or no research presented. Needs significant support to develop research skills.
Subject Knowledge Understanding and application of subject knowledge. Contribution to subject debate.	Shows sustained breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.	Shows breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Some awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.	Accurate and extensive understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge.	Accurate understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge.	Understanding of key aspects of subject. Some evidence of coherent knowledge.	Some evidence of superficial understanding of subject. Inaccuracies.	Little or no evidence of understanding of subject. Inaccuracies.
Critical Analysis Analysis and interpretation of literature, sources and/or results; structuring of issues/debates	Very high-quality analysis developed independently. Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications.	Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications.	Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence and states the implications.	Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments.	Some attempt at evaluation and synthesis. Some use of evidence-based arguments.	Limited evaluation and synthesis. Limited use of evidence-based arguments.	Little or no evaluation and synthesis. Very little use of evidence-based arguments.
Communication and Presentation Clear intention in communication. Audience needs are predicted and met. Presentation format is used skilfully. Work is well structured.	Communication is entirely clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience.	Communication is clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience.	Communication is clear, mostly persuasive and compelling with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses the needs of the audience.	Communication is clear, with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation takes into account the needs of the audience.	Communication is mostly clear and presentation format is adequate. Presentation may sometimes not take into account the needs of the audience.	Communication is unclear because presentation format is not used adequately and/or the needs of the audience are not taken into account.	Communication is very unclear because presentation format is not used adequately, and the needs of the audience are not taken into account.
Data literacy Competence in working ethically with data including data access, data extraction, interpretation and representation.	An exceptional level of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.	Highly developed competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.	Well-developed competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.	Evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.	Limited evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data, with some minor errors.	Evidence of limited competence in the ethical use and presentation of data, with some major errors.	Little or no evidence of competence in the ethical use and presentation of data.
Psychology Division Categorical Marks	100, 92, 85,	78, 75, 72	68, 65, 62	58, 55, 52	48, 45, 42

For faster services, inquiry about new assignments submission or follow ups on your assignments please text us/call us on +1 (251) 265-5102