experimental research a good structure – Hire Academic Expert

Generic Feedback based upon all scripts marked

 

 

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA GRADE AS REFLECTION OF GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA
  0-29%

Poor

30-39%

Weak

40-49%

Acceptable

50-59%

Sound

60-69%

Good

70-79%

Excellent

80%+

Outstanding

Title, Introduction & Research Hypothesis (20%)

Outline an investigation to explore a research question or hypotheses.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:

Title – The title must be indicative of the research completed.  For experimental research a good structure would be ‘The effect of the Independent Variable on the Dependent Variable’.  Look at your reference for further ideas.

 

Introduction – The introduction to a report is different to an essay.  The objective is to create a rationale for the study.  A rationale means creating a justification for completing this study or aspect of the study.  This is done by reviewing previous literature and explaining relevant theories that you plan to test.

 

Many students wrote one very long paragraph.    With a recommended 500word introduction, this is likely 3 paragraphs with each paragraph having a theme.

 

Research Hypothesis – The experimental hypothesis should be written as taught in class on in the Introduction to Difference tests video.  A number of you forgot to add this.  I would recommendation having the assessment guide open as you write your work to ensure you include all required elements.

 

Method (25%)

Conduct and report appropriate methods of data collection and analysis following the conventions of sport, exercise, and health sciences.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:

Participants – Describe the type of participants by indicating the programme of study – sport.  Many students provided incorrectly formatted tables, see the table formatting guide on Moodle for how to create a well structure table.  See below for the table structure needed here.

 

Research Design – If an experiment includes both pre and post and two or three independent groups that should be described as a mixed design.  Too many people only identified one of the independent variables.

 

Procedure – The reader should be able to replicate the study based upon your writing.  Include as much detail about how the dependent variable was measured and how the independent variable was manipulated.  Literature should be included to explain the procedures followed; this helps to validate the study.  If you are worried about word count, you can put some of the procedure in a table, for example the stretching procedures used for Q1 and 2.

 

Data Analysis & Statistical Analysis – Start this section by addressing the assumptions of the statistical tests you plan to use, that is normal distribution and for independent groups tests equality of variance.  Rewatch the videos on Normal Distribution and Homogeneity of Variance to learn more.  The criteria for the assumptions should be stated and referenced (best to use a statistics textbook).

Numerical distribution checks were not provided within the appendices for too many students.  You needed to include zskewness and zkurtosis and label those calculations.

 

If ratio data is normally distributed the use mean and standard deviation, if however, ratio data is not normally distributed you should be using median and interquartile range.

 

Most of you chose the correct tests.  The table of tests we used this year will be useful again next year.

The effect size criteria should be stated and referenced.  The criteria for Cohen’s d and Rank Bi-Serial Correlation r are not the same.  Many of you claimed to have read Cohen (1988) so would know this.

 

Results of descriptive and inferential statistics are reported in the results not the statistical analysis.  The statistical analysis section is the method.

 

Do not use personal pronouns in your writing, therefore no ‘I’, ‘We’ or ‘Our’.

 

 

Table 1

Mean and Standard Deviation (s) of Participant Characteristics for Male and Females

  Sex of Participants
Male   Female   All
  Mean s   Mean s   Mean s
Age (years)
Height (cm)
Mass (kg)                
Note.  The final column displays the mean and s for all participants.

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA GRADE AS REFLECTION OF GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA
  0-29%

Poor

30-39%

Weak

40-49%

Acceptable

50-59%

Sound

60-69%

Good

70-79%

Excellent

80%+

Outstanding

Results (20%)

Provide appropriate evidence to support results and conclusion.

 

Interpret results in a sport, exercise, and health sciences context.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:

Assumption checks for distribution and equality of variance are not reported in the results.  This information is addressed in the statistical analysis.

 

Description of the Pattern of Data – You needed to explain what happened to your measures of average and spread.  Did the mean value increase from pre to post?  Did one condition have a higher score than the other?  Tell the story.

 

For those of you who added graphs, those graphs should be consistent with the choice of descriptive statistics, Mean and Standard deviations are shown in Bar Graphs, whilst Median and IQR should be shown in Boxplots.

See the Figure formatting guide on Moodle for how to create a well structure Figure.  See below for an example figure.

Some of you did not add the error bars correctly – do not trust Excel to do this for you – use this YouTube video to learn how to do this correctly.

 

Reporting of Inferential Statistics – Some of you did not complete the analysis correctly, for mixed designs we needed four tests.  Two comparing the two groups against each other and two test comparing pre to post within each group.

If you find a significant difference you must indicate which condition was better to make the finding meaningful.

 

The formatting instructions were provided in the assessment guide so please refer to those if you have comments that indicate you did not format your work correctly.

 

Appendices are evidence that you have reported your values correctly, the output in the appendices should not be referred to in the report.   If you wanted the information in the report it should have been presented in the report.

 

It would help if appendices were labelled which condition was being tested for when using your tests.  Clearly structured appendices will help us identify the output that support your work.

 

 

 

 

Figure 1.

Mean Elevation Gain for Walk Locations, Local (n = 89), Rowlands Castle (n = 2), Southdowns (n = 18) and Goodwood (n = 2) Participants

Note. The error bars represent one standard deviation above and below the mean.

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA GRADE AS REFLECTION OF GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA
  0-29%

Poor

30-39%

Weak

40-49%

Acceptable

50-59%

Sound

60-69%

Good

70-79%

Excellent

80%+

Outstanding

Discussion (20%)

Interpret results in a sport, exercise, and health sciences context.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:

Explanation of Findings – Start with the main finding of your study.  You must be consistent with the statistics reported, you should not imply there is a difference if your statistics did not find one.

Having established your finding compare your work to the research papers you used in the introduction.  Does your conclusion support or not support their work?  If it does not support, why not?  Usually, differences in how data was collected (method).

Using the theories proposed in the research papers indicate which theory should be applied to your work?

 

Application of Findings – How would an athlete/coach or health practitioner use your research.  Research should be useful.

 

Limitations – The limitations should be logical, and evidence based.  If the limitation is anecdotal, i.e., based upon your experience I would not include it.  Whilst your experience is valuable how can you be sure that everyone experienced the testing the same way?

 

Recommendations – Recommendations for future research should advance upon the finding of this study.  What other condition should be added or who should be tested next time.  This is not about addressing limitations.

 

Conclusion – Provide a take home message for your reader.

 

The discussion should have distinct paragraphs.  Each paragraph would again be thematic.

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

GRADE AS REFLECTION OF GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA
Citations and References (5%)

Demonstrate appropriate style of written communication including cohesive structure, correct grammar and punctuation including correctly presenting citations and references using the conventions of APA.

 

0%

No Citations or Attempt to follow Guidelines

20%

Major Errors (Inconsistent Presentation)

40%

Major Errors (Consistent Presentation)

60%

Minor Errors (Inconsistent Presentation)

80%

Minor Errors (Consistent Presentation)

100%

Perfect No Errors

           
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:

Only reference what you have cited.  Use the referencing guide on Moodle to review how to reference your work.  Lots of people lost marks for inconsistent use of capital letters in the formatting.

Referencing is worth 5% for most assignments, maximise your mark by referencing correctly

 

 

 

  0-29%

Poor

30-39%

Weak

40-49%

Acceptable

50-59%

Sound

60-69%

Good

70-79%

Excellent

80%+

Outstanding

Appendices (5%)

Inclusion of JASP output to support reported results.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:
Distribution Checks Included

 

Most did include this, but some forgot to add zskewness and zkurtosis Inferential Statistics Included

 

Most did this
Formatting (5%)

The ability to communicate according to academic conventions.

 

             
Marker’s comments in relation to assessment criteria:
File Name including Student number and Question number Yes Font Size 12 – Calibri Yes
Student number in Header (top left) Yes 1.5 Line Spacing Yes
Page Number in Header (top right) Yes Full Justification Lots did not use full justification
Feed forward – Use these comments to improve your work for future assignments

1)      You will complete more reports during your degree.  Use this report and the individual feedback you got as a resource for those future reports.  There will be expectations of you from other tutors that you know what to write and in which section because you have completed this module.

 

2)      The tests we taught on this module will be used again next year.  Again, you will be assumed to know how to use these tests for the rest of your degree.

 

3)      Take the time now to work on your writing.  Go back and look at thematic writing which was taught on Questioning Sport Exercise and Health and Fundamentals of Sports Therapy.  This writing style and structure is what is wanted in all coursework.  Speak to your academic advisor if you are getting consistent feedback from modules that you should work on your writing.

 

 

Comments are closed.