4. Assessment

4.4. Project Report (50% of total marks)

Students must produce a 1500 – 2000 word write-up of an aspect care that you have chosen to study in depth; the choice of topic should be negotiated with the tutor.   It must be completed and handed in to the tutor for marking by Day 11.

 

It must also be submitted electronically to the MedSoc Project Report folder on the JISC Plagiarism Detection Website by Day 11.  Please submit the entire document including your reference list and any pictures or tables.

 

Any essays that are graded <8 /16 or >14/16 will be second marked and if necessary moderated.  The choice of project should be agreed no later than Day 8. The project can take a variety of forms, for example:

 

  • an audit of some element of service provision;
  • a patient information leaflet;
  • an analysis of the health promotion strategies relevant to a particular condition,
  • a description of one illness/condition, and an analysis of its impact on the patient, his family and their immediate community
  • a description/appraisal of one type of intervention (treatment or management), including the underlying scientific principles, its acceptability to patients and their family and its effectiveness;
  • a description and analysis of the work of the placement team or one particular professional group.

 

You can undertake projects in pairs or small groups, but each student must undertake a write-up of their project individually. 

  • The project report must have a suitable structure.  Students may wish to use their own, or the following: an overall introduction; discussion and a conclusion.
  • The introduction to the project should include the reason why it was chosen, the background, and an outline of the aims and objectives the student intends to cover. 
  • The discussion should demonstrate and ability to look critically at the topic using references to literature to support the argument.
  • The conclusion should address whether the aims and objectives set out in the discussion were met, and any further issues/questions for further study.
  • Literature cited must be referenced.  Referencing must follow the Harvard or Vancouver style (See Appendix for guidelines on referencing).  Referenced material should include up-to-date journal articles as well as basic textbooks and Internet resources.
  • It must be word-processed with a clear layout and neat presentation, including appropriate ‘signposts’, diagrams, graphs, tables, illustrations.
  • Appendices with other relevant data (e.g. a copy of a leaflet that has been a product of the project etc.) may be added. 
  • The marked report, with comments, should be returned you on Day 11.

 

There is a prize for the best project report in the year,  tutors can nominate students.  Students can also self-nominate.  Any project report scoring 15 or 16/16 will be automatically considered.


Project Report Marking Criteria

 

Each of the four sections – introduction, discussion, conclusion and presentation/referencing – is marked out of four.

 

4/4

3/4

2/4

1/4

0/4

Good introduction, covering the reasons for selecting the project topic. Interesting and comprehensive background information, demonstrating background reading/research.

Appropriate introduction, with some explanation of choice of topic.  Good coverage of background information on the topic.

Adequate introduction, some gaps in rationale for choosing the project topic. Adequate coverage of background information.

Some attempt at an introduction; background information and rationale for the topic of the project, but not to an appropriate level.

Inadequate introduction, no evidence of background reading.

Discussion of topic covered in a way which shows a depth of understanding, exploration and synthesis of information, not superficial reporting of facts.

Discussion of area addressed shows good understanding.

Discussion demonstrates basic understanding, but limited to a factual account only, with little discussion.

Superficial reporting, no demonstration of in-depth understanding of topic.

Lack of evidence that student has understood the information, with a tendency to regurgitate facts. Poor discussion.

 

Conclusion shows good integration of introduction and discussion, introduces issues for further exploration.

Good conclusion demonstrating curiosity.

Conclusion does not raise issues for further exploration.

Weak conclusion.

No conclusion.

Excellent presentation.  Clear structure, well laid out (with signposts).

Wide range of recent sources of literature listed, with full referencing in Harvard or Vancouver style.

Readable and clear layout, good illustration with some diagrams, adequately annotated.

Good range of literature and sources (since 1995), fully referenced in Harvard or Vancouver style.

Acceptable presentation.

Basic sources listed on a limited range of subjects. Referenced in Harvard or Vancouver style.

Disorganised presentation, poor or no illustration.

Few sources referenced, only basic texts (e.g. Kumar and Clark) on a restricted range of subjects.

Poor presentation, no obvious structure, difficult to read. Inaccuracies.

Limited, incomplete or no referencing.

 

Students should be given a numerical mark out of 16 for the project report.