ASSIGNMENT BRIEF

Module title Postgraduate Study and Research Methods

Module code COM742 (Exceptional Resit 2022)

Module leader Leanne Davies

Assessment title Assignment 2: Small Scale Research Study

Launch date 16th December 2022

Submission deadline 20th January 2023

Expected date for return Students will be given feedback within three working
of marks and feedback weeks of the assignment deadline. Feedback and
grades will be available on Moodle under the
‘Assignments and Feedback’ section of the module
Moodle page.

Module outcomes 3. Synthesise and iterate a professional plan for a

assessed research study

4. Demonstrate a critical understanding of research

methodologies in computing

Assessment weighting 50%

Word count (if relevant) 2500

Assessment task details - provide a description of the task

You are required to plan and conduct an appropriate research activity (the
choice of which is at your discretion but should be discussed with your module
tutor).

This activity may take several forms and could be, for example: a survey or
questionnaire; piece of experimental work; observational study; desk-based
literature review; secondary data analysis; systematic review; meta-analysis;
interview; and so on. This activity should follow a clearly defined area of
investigation that you will select. Initially, you must be clear in defining a
hypothesis or question that your research activity will address. This will form the
basis for all the work in this assignment.

Once your research has been carried out you should discuss and critically
analyse your results and draw conclusions from your activities.
You should gain the approval of your module leader before starting work by
submitting a brief research proposal, which must include a brief research plan,
written prior to starting any research activities, highlighting the main activities to
be carried out, their duration, objectives, and how you will acquire the skills
needed to execute each of these actions.

Important Note: You are required to complete, and gain the endorsement of
your lecturer for, an Ethical approval of research projects in taught programmes
form prior to beginning any data collection or experimental work. This form can
be found on the module Moodle page and should be submitted via email to the
module tutor. Responses from the tutor regarding ethical approval will be given
via email. The request for ethical approval documentation is required but does
not form part of the marked submission for this assignment. It is likely, in most
cases, that your module leader will be able to give ethical approval but check
this with them before you proceed

Submission instructions - What should be the format of the submission? / Where

should it be submitted?

Academic integrity is an important part of your learning and assessment. On

submission of an assignment, software called Turnitin is automatically used to
check the similarity of your work to other sources of information and the work
produced by other students. The similarity scores are reviewed by the marking
team and any similarity scores that are a cause for concern will be flagged and
investigated. By submitting this work, you confirm that you have read,
understand and accept the university’s regulations regarding academic integrity
and academic misconduct such as plagiarism and collusion and agree to be
subject to the academic integrity process if any such situation should arise.

Work should be submitted as a single Word or PDF document only, containing

your assignment and a reference list. No appendices are required. A template is
provided on the module space, which must be followed. Please submit online via
the appropriate Turnitin submission on the module space.

You will work on this assignment individually and submit your work in a single
file to Moodle. In working individually, you must not share your ideas, data
or other work product with other students.
All submitted work is expected to observe academic standards in terms of
referencing (IEEE), academic writing, use of language etc. Failure to adhere to
these instructions may result in your work being awarded a lower grade than it
would otherwise deserve.

The individual work should be prepared and formatted according to the IEEE
Transactions two-column document.

Resit students MAY NOT select the same research subject and method
previously used in a submission.

Hints and tips

In evaluating your research hypothesis, provided your methodology is sound,

then proving your hypothesis, disproving it or finding the result inconclusive are
equally valid research contributions.
In formulating your work, you may wish to consider the following:

• Existing data and results already available on the subject

• The independent and dependent variables
• Populations, sampling approach and sample sizes
• The types of variables you will work with
• A description and justification of the method you will use
• Ethical considerations
• Constraints and controls you have identified and/or assumed
• Data collection methods
• Techniques for data analysis and visualisation
• Statistical testing or analysis
• The reliability and validity of your research data

Make use of the various digital library subscriptions that the University has
access to, particularly IEEE Xplore and the ACM Digital Library, as well as
Google Scholar.
Try to be as concise and focused as you can be in producing your report. Do not
add words for the sake of it. Make sure each word and sentence contribute
something useful.

Marking and moderation

All work is fully marked by the module leader or a team associate. A

representative sample of work from each cohort will be second-marked to
ensure quality and consistency.

All required work must be submitted, in full and as directed and described, by the
due time and date, to achieve marks reflecting its full worth. Work submitted
after the due time and date, but within one calendar week, will be capped at
40%. Work more than a week late will not be marked and will be entered as 0%.

Please study the marking criteria provided to fully understand how marks will be
awarded for your work.

Employability Skills Applied

On successful completion of this module, a student will have had opportunities to

demonstrate achievement of the following Employability Skills;

Tick all that apply.

CORE ATTRIBUTES
Engaged ☑
Creative ☑
Enterprising
Ethical
KEY ATTITUDES
Commitment
Curiosity ☑
Resilient ☑
Confidence ☑
Adaptability ☑
PRACTICAL SKILLSETS
Digital fluency ☑
Organisation ☑
Leadership and team working
Critical thinking ☑
Emotional intelligence ☑
Communication ☑
 Marking Criteria
ELEMENT ASSESSMENT TASK <40: 40%+: 50%+: 60%+: 70%+:
Ethical Approval No Ethical Approval Ethical Approval Ethical Approval Gained Ethical Approval gained Ethical Approval gained Ethical Approval gained
obtained/ declined gained after however comments and comments and feedback comments and feedback comments and feedback
but proceeded research work feedback disregarded considered considered considered
Weighting: 10%
irrespective began

Learning
Outcome 3,4

Research Relevant research Insufficient or Mainly Reasonable research A good research A very relevant research A well-considered research
method & method applied and inappropriate method/ plan method/plan with limited method /plan with a good method plan with excellent
Planning justified research justification level of justification justification
method/plan
Weighting 30%

Learning
Outcomes: 3,4
Hypothesis Clear and well defined Insufficient or Mainly reasonable Good consideration of A very good consideration of Excellent consideration of
hypothesis or question inappropriate hypothesis/research hypothesis/research hypothesis/research question hypothesis/research question
that your research hypothesis/research question – areas that are question good level of good level of clarity and with an excellent level of
Weighting 30% activity will address question unclear or lack definition clarity and definition definition clarity and definition

Learning
Outcomes:3,4
Critical Critical analysis and Insufficient or A mainly reasonable Critical A good Critical Analysis/ A very good Critical An excellent, professional and
Analysis and discussion of your inaccurate Critical Analysis/discussion with discussion with minor Analysis/discussion with a accurate Critical Analysis and
discussion research Analysis/discussion significant inaccuracies in inaccuracies in areas good level of accuracy discussion
areas
Weighting 30%

Learning
Outcomes: 3,4
Presentation Present your work in a Insufficient or Reasonable level of A good presentation of your A very good presentation of An excellent presentation of
clear and professional inappropriate presentation work your work your work.
manner presentation
Weighing 10%
Reference base Provide a suitable set Inadequate or Adequate reference base in Sound reference base in Good reference base in terms Excellent reference base in
of verifiable sources to inappropriate terms of size and focus. terms of size and focus. of size and focus. terms of size and focus.
support your reference base
Weighting 5%
discussion