qUESTIONS AS ATTACHED
Marking Guide Assessment task 2 – Literature review Presentation 0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points 4 points 5 points PRESENTATION Structure Presentation displayed no clear structure and sequence. Did not follow the assessment guidelines. Moderate structure and/or sequence of presentation. Poorly followed the assessment guidelines. Presentation required a more clear structure/ sequence, and/or better linking dialogue between information. Presentation displayed a clear structure and sequence – introduction, body, and conclusion, references Linking dialogue provided. Presentation displayed a good structure and sequence –introduction, body, and conclusion, references Linking dialogue provided. Presentation displayed excellent structure and sequence – introduction, body, and conclusion, references Linking dialogue provided. PRESENTATION Fluency Format of presentation was poor with no fluency between, themes or information. Format required greater attention to ensure the presenter, themes or information flowed. Format required more attention to ensure the presenter, themes or information flowed. Format of presentation flowed at times, themes and information. Format of presentation flowed most of the time, appropriate themes and mostly relevant information. Format of presentation flowed at all times, with sound themes and relevant information. RESEARCH QUESTION Not present Present but not well defined Present slightly explained Present with some demonstration of thought when using a PICO approach Present with good demonstration of thought when using a PICO approach Present with excellent demonstration of thought when using a PICO approach CONTENT Literature table No understanding of the task demonstrated. No links or connections made between ideas. Information was irrelevant and poorly expressed. Poor understanding of the task demonstrated. Links and connections between ideas unclear. A lot of information was irrelevant or poorly expressed. Minimal understanding of the task demonstrated. Numerous links and connections between ideas unclear. Some information was irrelevant or not well expressed. Moderate understanding of the topic demonstrated. Some links and connections between ideas unclear. Most information was relevant. Substantial understanding of the task demonstrated. Links and connections between ideas generally clear. Information was relevant. Excellent understanding of the task demonstrated. Links and connections between ideas made clear. Information was relevant and well expressed. CONTENT Use of CASP tool No evidence of the use of the CASP tool CASP tool mentioned CASP tool mentioned and demonstrated CASP tool used to critique papers and scores present in table CASP tool critique is demonstrated well throughout table CASP tool critique is demonstrated well and explained CONTENT Literature flow chart Flow chart was absent, did not follow the assessment guidelines for this task. The flow chart was poorly constructed, with little evidence of a logical sequence. The Flow chart showed some detail and logical sequence. The Flow chart showed moderate detail and logical sequence. The Flow chart showed good sound detail and logical sequence. The Flow chart showed excellent detail and logical sequence. CONTENT Discussion Findings section was absent, did not follow the assessment guidelines for this task. The findings section was poorly constructed, with little evidence of a logical sequence. The findings section showed some detail and logical sequence. The Findings section showed moderate detail and logical sequence. The Findings section showed good sound detail and logical sequence. The Findings section showed excellent detail and logical sequence. CONTENT Critique No critique of the literature Literature is poorly critiqued Some attempt at critique of the literature was made The literature has been critiqued with some attempt at linking the papers together The literature has been critiqued well with some attempt at papers linked together An excellent literature critique with an link between papers demonstrated STRUCTURE Professional Prose Inconsistent levels of articulation or expression, numerous spelling and grammatical errors and lack of sentence/paragraph structure makes paper difficult to read/understand. Poor level of articulation and expression, with sentence or paragraph structure unclear, and/or extensive spelling or grammatical errors. Minimal level of articulation and expression, with some sentence or paragraph structure unclear, and/or a considerable number of spelling or grammatical errors. Moderate level of articulation and expression, with some sentence or paragraph structure unclear, and/or a number of spelling or grammatical errors. Substantial level of articulation and expression, with clear and concise sentence and paragraph structure, and minimal spelling or grammatical errors. Excellent level of articulation and expression, with clear and concise sentence and paragraph structure, and no spelling or grammatical errors. REFERENCES APA Style and credibility No references cited. Incorrect APA referencing style for in- text citations quotes and/or references. Numerous errors noted in APA referencing of in- text citations, quotes or references. Some references are NOT reputable, current, extensive or relevant. A couple of errors noted in APA referencing of in-text citations, quotes or references. A number of references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant In-text citations and quotes and referencing are in APA style of a sound quality. Most references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant All in-text citations, quotes and references are in APA style of a very high quality. All references are reputable, current, extensive and relevant. Assessment task 2 - Literature Review In this assessment task students are instructed to conduct a review of the literature using a systematic approach. There will be three sections to this assessment task, creation of a flow chart that represents how the literature search was conducted including the inclusion / exclusion criteria, the final selected papers represented in a table format highlighting the following aspects; author/year/country, methodology, participants, key findings, and a detailed description of the key findings of the selected papers. Word limit is 2000 words. Purpose: To develop and demonstrate skills related to reviewing nursing literature using a systematic approach. Description: Students will be instructed to choose a research topic of interest and conduct a review of the literature. Students are required to complete a written piece of work with the following headings: Search strategy, Table 1 Flow chart of literature search, Table 2 Selected literature Summary, Key findings, Reference list (refer to Moodle for a description of each section of this assessment task). Marking Criteria: Refer to Appendix I for specific details required for successful completion of task. Weighting: 50% Time Allocation: Approximately 10 hours This assessment task has 3 sections: 1. creation of a Flow chart that represents how the literature search was conducted including the inclusion / exclusion criteria, 2. Table: the final selected papers represented in a table format highlighting the following aspects; author/year/country, methodology, participants, key findings, CASP score of that particular article also can be included in your table And 3. Discussion section outlining the findings of the literature review. Word limit is 2000 words. Please click the below link for additional information on literature review in nursing and examples. https://libguides.federation.edu.au/c.php?g=477028&p=3261417 https://libguides.federation.edu.au/nursing https://libguides.federation.edu.au/ld.php?content_id=47896239 Literature Review Part A: Introduction https://libguides.federation.edu.au/c.php?g=477028&p=3261417 https://libguides.federation.edu.au/nursing https://libguides.federation.edu.au/ld.php?content_id=47896239 In quantitative research many researchers frame the research question using a PICO approach (Herbert et al 2005) however I find that this technique can be applied to both quantitative and qualitative research studies and is often a great place to start with formulating what it is your interested in studying. PICO stands for the following terms P - population (being studied) I - Intervention C - Comparison intervention O - Outcome (or outcome measures) For some of you this technique will be familiar you may have covered this in your first year research course, that's great for others it may be all new and a little confusing. 3. Key search terms Introduction Its now time to use that PICO research question to write down your key search terms. Lets use an example to help demonstrate the process that is required to conduct a literature review. The research question is "Do nurses routinely wash their hands in-between patients using universal precautions" P - Nurses I - Hand washing C - in-between patients O - Universal precautions Data bases There are a number of data bases in which to search for relevant literature, its important to choose the data base which will yield the most literature hits. Please note that Google Scholar is a search engine not a data base. Google scholar is a very useful tool and especially when its difficult to get the papers off a data base often you can find a copy of the paper you are looking for on Google scholar. However you need to use an official data base for this assessment task. The two most popular and useful databases for nursing / medical literature is MEDLINE and CINHAL. When going to the library website you will note that both data bases have the same template with the title of the data base at the top Please note than when choosing the data base it will appear as MEDLINE (EBSCO) and CINHAL Complete, there are other options but use these titles to find the right data base. Key search terms Lets consider our research question, and the terms that are within the PICO statement