Order this Assignment Now: £499 VALID THRU: 04-Apr-2025
HS 3018 Dissertation - BSC in Nursing
HS 3018 Dissertation - BSC in Nursing
The price includes both the Research Proposal and Complete Dissertation
Programme Name:
BSC in Nursing
Module Name:
Dissertation
Module Code:
HS3018
Module Credits:
30
Year of Study:
2023
Level:
6
Assessment Name:
Research Proposal
Assessment Weighting:
100%
Pass mark:
40%
Contact:
If you have questions about the assessment requirements please contact the module leader, or your designated Seminar lead.
For questions about the practicalities around completing and submitting the assessment, please contact Designated seminar lead.
You are required to achieve the minimum pass mark of 40%
Assessment Overview
Aims
The aim of this module is to develop students understanding of the research process to develop a research proposal.
Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this module, you will be expected to be able to:
F=Formative
S=Summative
Critically apply knowledge of research methods, ethics, and governance to inform best nursing practice. (S)
Critically apply knowledge and use evidence and experience in decision making. (F)
Explain the difference between different research designs and methodologies, and their uses. (S)
Develop an academic argument based upon a systematic and critical understanding of a topic. (S)
Identify and explore how the drivers for change and leadership in practice should be underpinned by critical, research-based knowledge skills. (F)
Identify an area of uncertainty in clinical practice and formulate an answerable question. (S)
Formulate a literature review question using an established method, such as PICO or SPIDER, and the associated inclusion and exclusion criteria. (F, S)
Develop and implement a systematic search strategy to identify appropriate research literature, using electronic bibliographic resources. (S)
Critically appraise the evidence to establish its quality, using appropriate appraisal tools (e.g., CASP, SIGN). (S)
Identify, summarise, and present the key findings of your review in a suitably academic manner (S) • Evaluate how ethical and legal challenges have been addressed in evaluating the range of evidence under review. (S)
Make decisions on best available evidence and be able to present a well-constructed argument and rationale for those decisions with reference to informing policy or practice development and interprofessional working values and attitudes. (S):
Evaluate critically the range of potential implications for the patient, user, or carer of the development and implementation of evidence-based practice. (S)
Identify the ethical concerns presented by the research. (S)
Identify and critically explore the competing and sometimes incompatible perspectives that underpin the evidence base for practice. (F)
Assessment Details
You are expected to write a 4850-word research proposal ±10%. After identifying a research problem, you must formulate a research question(s). You are then expected to outline the proposed methods to answer your research question(s) including all aspects of the research process, as outlined in the marking criteria (rubric). Your word count includes all words and characters that make up the body of your work. This includes any abstract, headings, tables, diagrams, quotations, citations, and footnotes. It does not include the title of your work. It does not include reference lists or bibliographies at the end of your work. It also does not include information contained in any appendices. Generally, information which is essential to your work should be included in the body of your work and not added to appendices. Please see program handbook and individual assessment guidance around formatting of your work including referencing style, footnotes, and appendices.
Assessment deadlines:
1st Submission 3/4/2025 by 14:00
2nd Submission 31/07/2025 by 14:00
Marking Criteria (Rubric)
They are descriptions, based on the module’s learning outcomes, of the skills, knowledge, or attributes you need to demonstrate to complete an assessment successfully.
HS3018 Dissertation Marking rubric 2024-2025
Pass
Fail
Grade
Outstanding/ very good
70-100%
Good
60-69%
Fair
50-59%
Satisfactory
40-49%
Poor
39% and below
Marker to indicate grade awarded in this column.
Introduction and Background and Forming a Research Question (10%)
10-9
8-7
6-5
4-3
0-2
Clearly state the research question which your study will address, ensuring it is clear, focused, and answerable.
A clearly presented and accurate structured abstract was provided.
Very good background to topic, with very good consideration of current health care context.
Key terms defined.
Research question very well formulated.
Aims and objectives clear and explicit.
A structured abstract was provided but some information may have been missing.
Good background to topic, with good consideration of current health care context.
Key terms defined.
Research question well formulated.
Aims and objectives clear and explicit.
An unstructured abstract was provided but contained relevant information.
Reasonable background to topic, with consideration of current health care context.
Key terms defined.
Research question formulated.
Aims and objectives identified.
An abstract was provided but did not follow guidelines.
Limited background to topic, with limited consideration of current health care context.
Some key terms defined but not all.
Research question developed but unclear/ does not reflect background.
Aims and objectives identified but limited in scope.hh
No abstract was provided.
Introduction and background to topic poorly considered. Relevance of topic poorly evaluated.
Key terms not defined.
Research question poorly formulated/ does not reflect background.
Aims and objectives limited/ not developed.
Justify your question and include key word search (30%)
30-26
25-21
20-16
15-11
10-0
Justify your research question with
An explanation of the problem it will address, and details of the extent and significance of the problem.
An in-depth key word search which evaluates the quality of existing evidence on this question and identifies the gap in knowledge which your study will address using an in-depth key word search of databases.
You should include an overview of the steps taken to identify your included studies.
To include:
Databases accessed. Search terms used. Eligibility criteria Chosen Appraisal tool. Study selection process outlined. Summary table Analysis of the Findings Thematic Analysis or Narrative Synthesis
A very good search strategy which is explicit and easily replicable.
Comprehensive set of search terms used.
Very good inclusion/ exclusion criteria which are rationalized, relevant and appropriate.
Appropriate appraisal tool selected and justified against others.
Study selection process very clearly outlined.
Data expertly synthesised and clearly presented
A good search strategy which may be replicable.
Search terms well selected.
Good inclusion/ exclusion criteria which are relevant and appropriate.
Appropriate appraisal tool identified, with some rationales offered.
Study selection process clearly outlined.
Data synthesised and clearly presented.
A reasonable search strategy but some areas are not clear.
Search terms appropriate but some may be missing.
Inclusion/ exclusion criteria reasonable but could have been developed further.
Appraisal tool identified.
Study selection process a little unclear.
Reasonable attempt at synthesizing the data.
Search strategy outlined but some aspects omitted/ unclear.
Some search terms identified but a little limited.
Inclusion/ exclusion criteria included but limited.
Appraisal tool not identified or not justified.
Study selection process unclear
Some attempt to synthesise the data.
Search strategy unclear and/ or incomplete.
Search terms not explicit.
Inclusion/ exclusion criteria not applied or are not relevant.
Appraisal tool not justified/ not identified.
No mention of how studies were selected.
No real synthesis evident.
Research proposal (50%)
50-41
31-40
21-30
11-20
0-10
Drawing on relevant methodological literature, explain and justify:
the criteria participants must meet to be included in your sample, how many you would sample; and how they would be contacted/invited.
your research approach and methods for data collection data analysis
potential ethical issues and how they will be addressed.
any steps you would take to ensure high quality, robust findings.
Any steps you would take to dissemination of findings and potential barriers to this.
Research approach is comprehensively discussed.
Accurate and comprehensive description of the research sample
Research approach is comprehensively discussed.
Data collection method is comprehensively presented.
Data Analysis approach is thoroughly considered and presented.
Ethical considerations are comprehensive.
Very good consideration of the barriers and facilitators to implementing the proposed recommendations.
Research approach is discussed.
Research sample described could be clearer.
Research approach is discussed.
Data collection method is discussed.
Data analysis approach is considered and presented.
Ethical considerations are discussed.
Good consideration of the barriers and facilitators to implementing the proposed recommendations
Research approach is described.
Research sample presented but has some gaps.
Research approach is described.
Data collection method is described.
Data analysis approach is described.
Ethical considerations are discussed.
Some consideration of the barriers and facilitators to implementing the proposed recommendations
Research approach is outlined.
Research sample contains some errors.
Research approach is outlined.
Data collection method is briefly mentioned but not developed.
Attempted to describe the data analysis approach.
Ethical considerations are mentioned
Limited focus on how recommendations could be implemented
Research approach is incorrectly presented or absent.
Research sample inaccurate/ not included.
Data collection inaccurate or absent
Data analysis approach is inaccurate or absent.
Ethical considerations inaccurate or not mentioned.
Unclear how these findings can be implemented into practice.
Structure and presentation (5%)
5
4
3
2
0-1
Clarity and logic in presentation.
Assessment of academic style
Professionally presented work that is logically developed.
Spelling and grammar correct, with very good academic style.
Professionally presented work that is logically developed.
A few minor spellings and/or grammatical errors may be evident.
Professionally presented work. The dissertation is well structured but lacks logical development in places.
Spelling and/or grammatical errors may be evident. Fair academic style.
Work is clearly presented, but logical/coherent development of ideas is not always evident.
Spelling and/or grammatical errors may be included. Satisfactory academic style.
Logical and coherent development is not evident within the dissertation
Numerous spellings and/or grammatical errors may be present. Weak academic style.
References (5%)
5
4
3
2
0-1
Support from peer reviewed literature
Accurate and complete reference list, with correct citation practice demonstrated throughout
http://0-www.citethemrightonline.com.wam.city.ac.uk/
Very good use of peer reviewed sources.
All references accurate and complete using City guidelines (within text and in reference list).
Good academic style. Good use of peer reviewed sources.
City guidelines used.
Minor inaccuracies in citation practice within text or reference list.
Reasonable use of peer reviewed sources.
City guidelines used.
Some inaccuracies in citation practice within text or reference list.
Use of some peer reviewed sources.
City guidelines used.
Several inaccuracies in citation practice within text or reference list.
Lack of use of peer reviewed sources.
City guidelines may not be used.
Numerous inaccuracies in citation practice within text and reference list/ reference list missing.
TOTAL
Feedback Summary
Areas for further development:
1.
2.
3.
Procedure
This section clarifies how assessments are submitted, how they are marked, how moderation works, and how and when feedback is provided.
Submission Requirements (for coursework)
When submitting through Turnitin on Moodle, the result and feedback will be via Turnitin on Moodle.
Electronic Submission
You should use the drop box in the relevant module in Moodle. Moodle uses the term ‘assignment’. This assignment will be submitted via Turnitin on the HS3018 Moodle page. The drop box will open at least one month prior to the advertised submission date and the deadline will be 14:00
Full instructions for submitting your assignment are available here: https://sleguidance.atlassian.net/wiki/display/STETG/Moodle+Assignment
Your coursework/assignment must be uploaded in Microsoft Office Word format. If you do not submit your work in the format specified you receive a mark of 0%.
IMPORTANT: Please save your file name with your module code followed by your student ID number (this is the registration number of your ID card). It is your responsibility to please ensure that your name does not appear anywhere in the file e.g., header or footer etc. Please use font size 12 and 1.5 spacing.
Turnitin submission video for students: Click here
Marking and Moderation Process
Marking will be anonymous and undertaken by a designated marking team
This submission made via Turnitin will be checked for similarity.
Marks will be internally moderated and then sent to an external examiner for external moderation.
The assessment will be marked anonymously. Before submission it should be checked by the Turnitin system to highlight similarity with other sources in its database – this is vast and includes submissions from students from around the world, papers, books, and internet resources. The marker will see areas of overlap highlighted on the submission that they mark and will check that there is no evidence of plagiarism or collusion. Please ensure you follow good academic practice – there are lots of resources online to help (you can start here: https://studenthub.city.ac.uk/help-and-support/improve-your-study-skills).
Marking quality is assured through a sampling moderation process as described in your programme Handbook (see pages 89-96 of your program handbook)
Feedback
Individual summary feedback giving overall evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of a submission
In-text highlighting and commenting on specific points of a coursework essay
Scores on individual marking criteria given in a rubric
On your assignment, you can expect to find 1) a feedback summary with development points (feedforward) 2) in-text comments highlighting areas of strength and suggestions for improvement 3) a breakdown of the marks using against the marking criteria (rubric). This will allow you to hone your academic skills as you progress. We strongly encourage you to speak to the module team about the feedback you receive if you have any questions or require clarification.
Written individual feedback will be provided four working weeks after the submission (28 calendar
We will ensure that feedback is constructively focused on helping develop skills to perform (even) better in future assessments – the idea of feedforward.
Sanctions
SANCTIONS
Late Submission: You can submit your work up to 24 hours after the assessment deadline, 10% of the maximum available marks will be deducted from your final mark. For example, if the assessment maximum mark is 100%, 10 marks will be deducted. (Refer to sanctions section of Programme Handbook for full details on hard copy and electronic copy deductions)
For electronic submission: if you do not submit your work in an appropriate format (see guidelines) YOU WILL RECEIVE A MARK OF 0%.
For electronic submission: If you do not submit your assignment in the submission drop box allocated for the module’s assessment YOU WILL RECEIVE A MARK OF 0%.
Exceeding the word limit will incur the following sanctions:
0-10% over word limit – no sanction
11-20% - minus 5 marks
21-40% - minus 10 marks
41-60% - minus 20 marks
Over 60% - to be resubmitted
Breach of confidentiality /Dangerous practice (You will automatically receive a grade of 0%)
All You Need to Know About HS 3018 Dissertation - BSC in Nursing
The HS 3018 Dissertation is a crucial component of the Bachelor of Science (BSc) in Nursing, representing the culmination of a student`s academic journey in the field. This module provides an opportunity for nursing students to engage in independent research, critically analyzing a specific topic relevant to healthcare practice. The dissertation is designed to enhance students` ability to apply theoretical knowledge to real-world nursing issues, fostering their skills in research, critical thinking, and evidence-based practice. It not only assesses their academic proficiency but also prepares them for the professional challenges they will face in their careers.
A key aspect of the HS 3018 Dissertation is the selection of a suitable research topic, which must align with contemporary nursing practices and address a significant healthcare concern. Students are encouraged to explore areas such as patient care, healthcare policies, nursing interventions, or emerging trends in clinical settings. The chosen topic should be both relevant and feasible, allowing for a thorough investigation within the given time frame. To ensure academic rigor, students must engage with existing literature, demonstrating an understanding of theoretical frameworks, ethical considerations, and methodological approaches.
The dissertation process is structured to support students through various stages of research. It typically begins with the development of a research proposal, outlining the study`s objectives, rationale, and methodology. This proposal must be approved by academic supervisors before students proceed with data collection or analysis. Depending on the nature of the research, students may opt for qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods approaches, each requiring careful justification. Ethical approval is a critical component, particularly if human participants are involved, ensuring that the study adheres to ethical guidelines and protects participants` rights and well-being.
Writing the dissertation requires a systematic and coherent approach, with clear sections covering the introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, discussion, and conclusion. The literature review is particularly significant, as it provides the foundation for the study by critically analyzing previous research and identifying gaps that the dissertation aims to address. The methodology section justifies the research design and data collection methods, while the findings and discussion present and interpret the results in relation to existing literature. Throughout the writing process, students must maintain academic integrity by properly referencing sources and adhering to the required formatting guidelines.
Successful completion of the HS 3018 Dissertation demonstrates a student’s ability to conduct independent research and contribute meaningfully to the nursing profession. It equips them with the analytical and problem-solving skills necessary for evidence-based practice, ultimately enhancing their competence as healthcare professionals. By engaging in this rigorous academic exercise, nursing students develop a deeper understanding of their field, preparing them for further studies or advanced roles in clinical practice, healthcare policy, and nursing leadership.
Order this Assignment Now:£499
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions
