Overview
In this unit, you will demonstrate understanding of research paradigms, design and ethical principles to appraise a research proposal, provided to you by the Unit Coordinator. This will include practical application of the principles outlined in the National Statement for Ethical Conduct of Research (2023).
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Students must be enrolled in CL22 Master of Clinical Nursing to undertake this unit. Co-requisites: NURS20168. Pre-requisites: NURS20167.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2025
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes - in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of 'pass' in order to pass the unit. If any 'pass/fail' tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully ('pass' grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the 'assessment task' section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University's Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure - Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure - International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback - Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
- Appraise a research proposal for its rigour and alignment with current expectations of ethical conduct of research.
- Demonstrate how to apply the ethical principles of research in practice.
There are no learning outcomes linked to external accreditation for this unit.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||
| 2 - Written Assessment - 60% | ||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 1 - Knowledge | ||
| 2 - Communication | ||
| 3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills | ||
| 4 - Research | ||
| 5 - Self-management | ||
| 6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility | ||
| 7 - Leadership | ||
| 8 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | ||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 7th Edition (APA 7th edition)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
j.bradshaw@cqu.edu.au
a.monson@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, contact Unit Coordinator to discuss learning and assessment tasks, attend Zoom drop-in.
Module/Topic
Why do we need ethics?
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, contact Unit Coordinator to discuss learning and assessment tasks, attend Zoom drop-in. Start thinking about your assessment.
Module/Topic
What are the principles of ethics?
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, contact Unit Coordinator to discuss learning and assessment tasks, attend Zoom drop-in. Start thinking about your assessment and begin to jot down some notes or a mind-map.
Module/Topic
Module 2 - What are the principles of ethics?
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, contact Unit Coordinator to discuss learning and assessment tasks, attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, jot down some notes or a mind-map and consider brainstorming some ideas with your Unit Coordinator.
Module/Topic
Module 3 - What are our guidelines
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, contact Unit Coordinator to discuss learning and assessment tasks, attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, start your draft.
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Module 3 - What are our guidelines?
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities. Attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, begin your second draft. Consider what questions you need to ask your Unit Coordinator about your assessment.
Module/Topic
Module 3 - What are our guidelines?
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities. Attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, begin your second draft. Consider what questions you need to ask your Unit Coordinator about your assessment.
Module/Topic
Module 4 - Ethical considerations in research proposals
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities. Attend Zoom drop-in. Consider any last minute questions you need to ask your Unit Coordinator about your assessment.
Written Assessment Due: Week 8 Wednesday (7 May 2025) 4:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Module 4 - Ethical considerations in research proposals
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, jot down some notes or a mind-map and consider brainstorming some ideas with your Unit Coordinator.
Module/Topic
Module 5 - Completing an ethics application
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, download the ethics application and consider what you need to learn or 'work-out' to complete the application.
Module/Topic
Module 5 - Completing an ethics application
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Complete all Moodle reading, watch videos, undertake activities, attend Zoom drop-in. For your assessment, begin completing the ethics application and research the areas that you cannot complete at the moment. Consider asking your Unit Coordinator for assistance on those areas that you cannot complete.
Module/Topic
Module 5 - Completing an ethics application
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Final week. Complete your ethics application.
Written assessment Due: Week 12 Wednesday (4 June 2025) 4:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Your Unit Coordinator for this term is Associate Professor Julie Bradshaw. Email: j.bradshaw@cqu.edu.au
1 Research Proposal
Unit Code: NURS20173
Unit Title: Midwifery and Social Sciences Project 1
Assessment 1
Type: Written Assessment
Due date: Wednesday May 7, 2025 4pm AEST
Extensions: Available as per policy
Return date: Results for this assessment will be made available on Wednesday May 14, 2025 4pm (AEST)
Weighting: 40%
Length: 2500-3000 words +/- 10% (excluding reference list)
Unit Coordinator: Associate Professor Julie Bradshaw
Learning Outcomes Assessed
1. Appraise a research proposal for its rigour and alignment with current expectations of ethical conduct of research.
Aim
The aim of this assessment is to provide you with an opportunity to study an example of historical research and analyse its conduct according to the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.
Instructions
Please follow the steps below to complete your assessment task:
Steps
1. Read the details of the Stanford Prison Experiment (Go to The Story, top right hand corner)
2. Download the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and study Section 1 ‘Values and principles of ethical conduct’ and Section 2 ‘Themes in research ethics: risk and benefit, consent’.
3. For each value and principle, discuss and analyse how the Stanford Prison Experiment met or violated this value or principle. Use the following values and principles:
· Research merit and integrity
· Justice
· Beneficence; and
· Respect.
Write as an academic essay.
1. Provide an introduction that introduces ethics in research and the need for ethics from a historical point of view (this is likely to take at least 2-3 paragraphs).
2. Provide an overview of what is ethics in research and the National Statement (3-4 paragraphs).
3. Provide an overview of the Stanford Prison Experiment (1-2 paragraphs)
4. Analyse the ethical conduct of this experiment using the values and principles from the National Statement (you should use at least two paragraphs for each value or principle).
5. Provide your conclusion from your analysis. (This is separate from the overall conclusion and should be 1-2 paragraphs).
6. Overall conclusion which summarises your paper and restates your own conclusion (1 paragraph).
Literature and references
In this assessment use at least 15 references to support your discussion. As you will be drawing on information related to ethics and a historical research project, there is no need for all references to be contemporary. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as from government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing, the Australian Association of Social Workers, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Note, that websites such as StatPearls, Life in the Fastlane, and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task. Lecture notes are not primary sources of evidence and should not be used in this assessment. All resources, other than web pages and grey literature, must be sources from the CQUniversity library.
Requirements
· Use a cover page for your assignment that includes in the following order:
· Student name
· Student number
· Unit code and name
· Assessment type
· Due date
· In-text word count
· Use of Gen AI: Gen AI agent.……..has been used for editing and proofreading this assessment (insert or delete as applicable.
· Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman, with 2.0 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).
· Include page numbers on the top right side of each page in a header.
· Indent the first line of each paragraph 1.27cm (standard pre-set indent in Microsoft Word).
· An introduction and conclusion are required for this assessment.
· All areas in the Instructions of this assessment must be attempted and clearly answered to pass this assessment task.
· Write in the third-person perspective
· Use formal academic, discipline specific, professional and inclusive language.
· Use Microsoft Word English (Australia) spelling and grammar checker.
· Paraphrase, summarise or quote information acknowledging the original source (referencing) to avoid plagiarism.
· Follow academic writing conventions: spell out contractions in full; introduce abbreviations and acronyms; spell out numbers for zero through nine and use numerals for numbers 10 and above.
· All work submitted must adhere to academic integrity guidelines.
· Start your reference list on a separate page to the body of your assessment.
· Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.
· The word count is considered from the first word of the introduction to the last word of the conclusion. The word count excludes the reference list but includes in-text references and direct quotations.
Resources
· You can use unit provided materials and other credible sources (e.g., journal articles, books) to reference your argument. The quality and credibility of your sources are important. Please note, lecture notes are not peer reviewed primary sources of evidence.
· We recommend that you access your discipline specific Nursing Resource Guide.
· You may like to manage your citations and reference list. Information on how to use academic referencing software (EndNote) is available at the CQUniversity Library website should you wish to learn how to use it.
· For information on academic writing and referencing please go to the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources, including information for students with English as a second language.
· You may wish to submit a draft to Studiosity.
· Submit at least one draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here. Please remember, the similarity score is only a matching tool, and the score alone does not necessarily indicate or eliminate the presence of plagiarism.
Academic Integrity
1. You must abide by the principles of academic integrity (see Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure). Completion of this assessment with another party or sharing of responses is not permitted at any time.
2. The use of any generative artificial intelligence is permitted for the following purposes:
a. Gen AI content is used to generate ideas and general structures.
b. Gen AI content editing.
c. Checking spelling and grammar (for example, Grammarly).
If you use Gen AI to generate ideas, you are required to reference the Gen AI agent as per APA 7th guidelines. If you are using a Gen AI agent for content editing, please complete the declaration on the title page of your assessment. If Gen AI is not used, please delete this declaration.
Week 8 Wednesday (7 May 2025) 4:00 pm AEST
Submit your assessment in Microsoft Word format only.
Week 9 Wednesday (14 May 2025)
Students will be advised of release of assessment marking via an announcement posted to the Announcement's Board on the Unit Moodle site. Please note, the 'Return to Students Information" is an approximate date.
|
Key Criteria |
High Distinction 84.5-100% |
Distinction 74.5-84.9% |
Credit 64.5-74.9% |
Pass 49.5-64.9% |
High Fail 40-49.5% |
Low Fail <40% |
Total |
|
Introduction and conclusion 10% |
(10–8.5) The essay has a clear and succinct introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides excellent background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion succinctly summarises the key points and has a concluding statement. |
(8.4–7.5) The essay has a clear introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides good background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion summarises most key points and has a concluding statement. |
(7.4–6.5) The essay has an adequate introduction and conclusion. The introduction provides some background information and outlines the direction of the essay, and the conclusion summarises some key points. |
(6.4–5) The introduction provides limited background information and an outline of the essay’s direction, and the conclusion has a few key points. |
(4.9-4) The introduction has significant errors and/or omissions. The conclusion does not summarise the assessment. |
(<4) The introduction and/or conclusion is omitted. |
|
|
Understanding of ethics in research (15 %) |
(15-13) A very clear understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
(12.9-11.25) A clear understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
(11-9.8) A largely clear understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
(9.6-7.5) Some understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
(7.4-6) An unclear understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
(<6) Inaccurate understanding of ethics in research is conveyed at the outset of the assessment and in the conclusion (this is the conclusion to the analysis and not the concluding paragraph). |
|
|
Research merit and integrity is analysed (15%) |
(15-13) A very clear understanding of research merit and integrity is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed correctly. |
(12.9-11.25) A clear understanding of research merit and integrity is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed correctly. |
(11-9.8) A largely clear understanding of research merit and integrity is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed mostly correctly. |
(9.6-7.5) A somewhat clear understanding of research merit and integrity is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed is somewhat correctly. |
(7.4-6) A vague understanding of research merit and integrity is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is mostly incorrect. |
(<6) Research merit and integrity is presented incorrectly and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is incorrect. |
|
|
Justice is analysed (15%) |
(15-13) A very clear understanding of justice is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed correctly. |
(12.9-11.25) A clear understanding of justice is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed correctly. |
(11-9.8) A largely clear understanding of justice is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed mostly correctly. |
(9.6-7.5) A somewhat clear understanding of justice is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed is somewhat correctly. |
(7.4-6) A vague understanding of justice is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is mostly incorrect. |
(<6) Justice is presented incorrectly and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is incorrect. |
|
|
Beneficence is analysed (15%) |
(15-13) A very clear understanding of beneficence is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed correctly. |
(12.9-11.25) A clear understanding of beneficence is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed correctly. |
(11-9.8) A largely clear understanding of beneficence is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed mostly correctly. |
(9.6-7.5) A somewhat clear understanding of beneficence is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed is somewhat correctly. |
(7.4-6) A vague understanding of beneficence is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is mostly incorrect. |
(<6) Beneficence is presented incorrectly and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is incorrect. |
|
|
Respect is analysed (15%) |
(15-13) A very clear understanding of respect is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed correctly. |
(12.9-11.25) A clear understanding of respect is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed correctly. |
(11-9.8) A largely clear understanding of respect is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed mostly correctly. |
(9.6-7.5) A somewhat clear understanding of respect is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this in the historical research is analysed is somewhat correctly. |
(7.4-6) A vague understanding of respect is presented and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is mostly incorrect. |
(<6) Respect is presented incorrectly and the ethical conduct in relation to this is in the historical research analysed is incorrect. |
|
|
Professional writing and presentation (10%) |
(10–8.5) Content is clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are no errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 12 appropriate references. Formatting requirements applied. Adheres to the word count |
(8.4–7.5) Content is clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are minimal errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 11 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count |
(7.4–6.5) Content is mostly clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a somewhat comprehensive understanding of the topic. There may be some errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 10 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count |
(6.4–5) Content is somewhat clear, accurate, and presented largely in a logical, succinct order demonstrating an understanding of the topic. There may be some errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 9 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count. |
(4.9-4) Content is mostly unclear, or may be inaccurate. Not presented in a logical order. Demonstrating a minimal understanding of the topic. There are multiple grammar or spelling errors. Submission is substantiated with less than 9 appropriate references. Does not adhere to the word count. |
(<4) Content is unclear, and/or inaccurate. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic. There are multiple grammar or spelling errors. Submission is not substantiated with appropriate references. Does not adhere to the word count |
|
|
Referencing (5%) |
(5-4.25) Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with no errors. Literature cited is sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(4.2-3.8) Acknowledges all sources and meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 1 error. Literature cited is sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(3.7-3.3) Acknowledges almost all sources and mostly meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 2 errors. Literature cited is sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(3.2-2.5) Acknowledges almost all sources and mostly meets APA (7th Edition) referencing standards with 3 errors. Literature cited is sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(2.45-2) Does not acknowledge most sources and/or does not meet APA (7th Edition) referencing standards. Some literature cited is not sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
(<2) Does not acknowledge sources or literature cited is not sourced from the CQUniversity library. |
|
|
TOTAL: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marker’s feedback |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No submission method provided.
- Design a low-risk quality improvement research-based proposal and justify an appropriate research paradigm and method to answer your research question.
- Develop and submit a low-risk ethics application that incorporates methodological rigour to promote credible research outcomes in answering your research question.
2 Report
Unit Code: NURS20173
Unit Title: Midwifery and Social Sciences Project 1
Assessment 2
Type: Written Assessment
Due date: Wednesday June 4, 2025 4pm AEST
Extensions: Available as per policy
Return date: Results for this assessment will be made available on Wednesday June 11, 2025 4pm (AEST).
Weighting: 60%
Length: No word limit ,
Unit Coordinator: Associate Professor Julie Bradshaw
Learning Outcomes Assessed
2. Demonstrate how to apply the ethical principles of research in practice.
Aim
The aim of this assessment is for you to prepare and complete an ethics application based on your own research question and chosen methodology.
Instructions
Please follow the steps below to complete your assessment task.
You have undertaken a literature review in order to gain an overview of the research in your chosen area, developed a research question and chosen a methodology. This assessment will give you the opportunity to ‘see what it will look like in the real world’. It will allow you to identify the reasons why the research should be done, its risk and benefits and ways of eliminating or minimising any risks.
Steps
1. Download an ethics application
When you open this link, go to Ethics, and then find the ‘plus sign’.
Click on this link.
Go to Human Feb 23.
Click on this and you will open an application form.
2. Complete the application. DO NOT SUBMIT to the CQUniversity Ethics Committee.
3. Develop additional material such as Consent Form, Information Sheet, Interview Schedule.
4. When you have completed, Go to Reports (bottom tile on the right-hand side) DO NOT SUBMIT.
5. Click on Print View (PDF version). This should generate a PDF.
Submit this PDF on your Moodle site PLUS all other additional material. Additional material should include your reference list.
Literature and references
In this assessment use at least 12 references to support your application. As you will be drawing on information related to methodology, there is no need for all references to be contemporary. Those related to the context of your research will need to be contemporary. Suitable references include peer-reviewed journal articles as well as textbooks and credible websites. When sourcing information, consider the 5 elements of a quality reference: currency, authority, relevance, objectivity, and coverage. Grey literature sourced from the internet must be from reputable websites such as from government, university, or peak national bodies: for example, the Australian College of Nursing, the Australian Association of Social Workers, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Note, that websites such as StatPearls, Life in the Fastlane, and Wikipedia are not suitable for this assessment task. Lecture notes are not primary sources of evidence and should not be used in this assessment. All resources, other than web pages and grey literature, must be sources from the CQUniversity library.
Requirements
· Use a cover page for your assignment that includes in the following order:
· Student name
· Student number
· Unit code and name
· Assessment type
· Due date
· Use of Gen AI: Gen AI agent.……..has been used for editing and proofreading this assessment (insert or delete as applicable.
· Use a conventional and legible size 12 font, such as Times New Roman, with 2.0 line spacing and 2.54cm page margins (standard pre-set margin in Microsoft Word).
· Write in the third-person perspective
· Use formal academic, discipline specific, professional and inclusive language.
· Use Microsoft Word English (Australia) spelling and grammar checker.
· Paraphrase, summarise or quote information acknowledging the original source (referencing) to avoid plagiarism.
· Follow academic writing conventions: spell out contractions in full; introduce abbreviations and acronyms; spell out numbers for zero through nine and use numerals for numbers 10 and above.
· All work submitted must adhere to academic integrity guidelines.
· Start your reference list on a separate page to the body of your assessment.
· Use the seventh edition American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style. The CQUniversity Academic Learning Centre has an online APA Referencing Style Guide.
· The word count is considered from the first word of the introduction to the last word of the conclusion. The word count excludes the reference list but includes in-text references and direct quotations.
Resources
· You can use unit provided materials and other credible sources (e.g., journal articles, books) to reference your argument. The quality and credibility of your sources are important. Please note, lecture notes are not peer reviewed primary sources of evidence.
· We recommend that you access your discipline specific Nursing Resource Guide.
· You may like to manage your citations and reference list. Information on how to use academic referencing software (EndNote) is available at the CQUniversity Library website should you wish to learn how to use it.
· For information on academic writing and referencing please go to the Academic Learning Centre Moodle site. The Academic Communication section has many helpful resources, including information for students with English as a second language.
· You may wish to submit a draft to Studiosity.
· Submit at least one draft before the due date to review your Turnitin Similarity Score before making a final submission. Instructions are available here. Please remember, the similarity score is only a matching tool, and the score alone does not necessarily indicate or eliminate the presence of plagiarism.
Academic Integrity
1. You must abide by the principles of academic integrity (see Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure). Completion of this assessment with another party or sharing of responses is not permitted at any time.
2. The use of any generative artificial intelligence is permitted for the following purposes:
a. Gen AI content is used to generate ideas and general structures.
b. Gen AI content editing.
c. Checking spelling and grammar (for example, Grammarly).
If you use Gen AI to generate ideas, you are required to reference the Gen AI agent as per APA 7th guidelines. If you are using a Gen AI agent for content editing, please complete the declaration on the title page of your assessment. If Gen AI is not used, please delete this declaration.
Week 12 Wednesday (4 June 2025) 4:00 pm AEST
Submit your assessment in Microsoft Word format only.
Review/Exam Week Wednesday (11 June 2025)
Students will be advised of release of assessment marking via an announcement posted to the Announcement's Board on the Unit Moodle site. Please note, the 'Return to Students Information" is an approximate date.
|
Key Criteria |
High Distinction 84.5-100% |
Distinction 74.5-84.9% |
Credit 64.5-74.9% |
Pass 49.5-64.9% |
High Fail 40-49.5% |
Low Fail <40% |
Total |
|
All sections completed (5%) |
(5–4.25) All sections are complete. |
(4.2–3.8) One section is not entirely complete. |
(3.7–3.3) Two sections are not entirely complete. |
(3.2–2.5) Two sections have areas missing. |
(2.45-2) Two to four sections have large areas missing. |
(<2) Whole sections are not complete. |
|
|
A concise and simple description (not more than 400 words) (15%) |
(15-13) Description is concise and simple and meets word count. |
(12.9-11.25) Description is largely concise and simple and meets word count. |
(18.5-16.2) Description is somewhat concise and simple and meets word count. |
(9.6-7.5) Description is either not very concise and/or not simple and exceeds or is less than word count. |
(7.4-6) Description is vague. |
(<6) Description is unclear. |
|
|
Risk level (15%) |
(15-13) Risk level is very well understood, and all risks are either mitigated and/or minimised. |
(12.9-11.25) Risk level is understood, and most risks are either mitigated and/or minimised. |
(11-9.8) Risk level is understood, and some risks are either mitigated and/or minimised. |
(9.6-7.5) Risk level is largely understood, and one risk is either mitigated and/or minimised. |
(7.4-6) Risk level is mostly not understood, and risks are not mitigated and/or minimised |
(<6) Risk level is not understood. |
|
|
Proposed participants (15%) |
(15-13) Sampling and recruiting are appropriate, and any risks related to this are either mitigated or minimised. |
(12.9-11.25) Sampling and recruiting are appropriate, and most risks related to this are either mitigated or minimised. |
(11-9.8) Sampling and recruiting are mostly appropriate, and some risks related to this are either mitigated or minimised. |
(9.6-7.5) Sampling and recruiting are largely appropriate, and some risks related to this are either mitigated or minimised. |
(7.4-6) Sampling and recruiting are mostly not appropriate, and risks related to this are not recognised. |
(<6) Sampling and recruiting are not appropriate, and risks related to this are not recognised. |
|
|
Project details (25%) |
(25-21.3) All project details are appropriate and very well explained. |
(21-18.6) All project details are appropriate and well explained. |
(18.5-16.2) All project details are mostly appropriate mostly well explained. |
(16-12.5) Some project details appropriate and are explained. |
(12.25-10) Project details are largely not appropriate and/or the explanation is vague. |
(<10) Project details are not appropriate and/or the explanation is not understandable. |
|
|
Data (5%) |
(5-4.25) A very clear understanding of data management is presented. |
(4.2-3.8) A clear understanding of data management is presented. |
(3.7-3.3) A somewhat clear understanding of data management is presented. |
(3.2-2.5) Data management understanding is not very clear, |
(2.4-2) A vague understanding of data management is presented. |
(<2) There is no understanding of data management. |
|
|
Consent (10%) |
(10–8.5) A very clear understanding of consent is presented. Consent form and Information sheet are appropriate and correct. |
(8.4–7.5) A clear understanding of consent is presented. Consent form and Information sheet are largely appropriate and correct. |
(7.4–6.5) A somewhat clear understanding of consent is presented. Consent form and Information sheet are largely appropriate mostly and correct. |
(6.4–5) Consent understanding is not very clear. Consent form and Information sheet are somewhat appropriate and mostly correct. |
(4.9-4) A vague understanding of consent is presented. Consent form and Information sheet may not be appropriate and/or correct. |
(<4) There is no understanding of consent. Consent form and Information sheet are not included. |
|
|
Dissemination (5%) |
(25-21.3) A very clear understanding of dissemination is presented. |
(21-18.6) A clear understanding of dissemination is presented. |
(18.5-16.2) A somewhat clear understanding of dissemination is presented. |
(16-12.5) Dissemination understanding is not very clear, |
(12.25-10) A vague understanding of dissemination is presented. |
(<10) There is no understanding of dissemination. |
|
|
Professional writing and presentation (5%) |
(5-4.2) Content is clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are no errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 12 appropriate references. Formatting requirements applied. Adheres to the word count. |
(4.2-3.8) Content is clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic. There are minimal errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is comprehensively used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 11 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count. |
(3.7-3.3) Content is mostly clear, accurate, and presented in a logical, succinct order demonstrating a somewhat comprehensive understanding of the topic. There may be some errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 10 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count. |
(3.2-2.5) Content is somewhat clear, accurate, and presented largely in a logical, succinct order demonstrating an understanding of the topic. There may be some errors in grammar or spelling. The language of the discipline is used. Submission is substantiated with a minimum of 9 appropriate references. Formatting requirements largely applied. Adheres to the word count |
(2.45-2) Content is mostly unclear, or may be inaccurate. Not presented in a logical order. Demonstrating a minimal understanding of the topic. There are multiple grammar or spelling errors. Submission is substantiated with less than 9 appropriate references. |
(<2) Content is unclear, and/or inaccurate. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic. There are multiple grammar or spelling errors. Application is not substantiated with appropriate references. |
|
|
TOTAL: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marker’s feedback |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Design a low-risk quality improvement research-based proposal and justify an appropriate research paradigm and method to answer your research question.
- Develop and submit a low-risk ethics application that incorporates methodological rigour to promote credible research outcomes in answering your research question.
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
