MODULE HANDBOOK BA M4X01434Academic skills.docx

MODULE HANDBOOK BA
M4X01434
Academic skills
LEVEL 4
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT
FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT
2017-2018
MODULE CODE: M4X01434
TITLE: Academic Skills
DATED: July 2016

LEVEL: 4
CREDITS 20
JACS CODE: N100
AIM(S)
The skills needed for higher education are ultimately gained
through studying at that level; they evolve and mature through
practice, trial and error, feedback from others and student
reflection. This module aims to provide students with the
underlying study/research strategies and software skills that can
accelerate that learning process. Students will be encouraged to
develop a reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and
to take responsibility for their own learning. Such skills
promote a deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout
the programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the
transferable skills desired in the employment context.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon the successful completion of this module, the student
should be able to demonstrate the ability to:
1. Analyse the published literature relating to a management
related topic and produce a fully referenced management report
2. Design and deploy a range of primary data collection
methods.
3. Evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data and
present the findings to specialist and non-specialist audiences
4. Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to
information gathering.

INDICATIVE CONTENT
· Identifying skills (e.g. self-evaluation, skills needed for higher
education, transferable/employment skills).
· Organising study (e.g. time management, organising space,
organising resources)
· Gathering relevant information (e.g. effective note taking,
using the library and the internet, reflecting on experience)
· Communicating and presenting information (e.g. presentation
techniques, styles)
· Developing an appropriate writing style (e.g. planning and
structuring essays and reports, linking ideas together, using
facts, opinions or arguments, analytical thinking, etc.)
· Referencing convention (e.g. the Harvard System)
· Revision and examination techniques (e.g. preparation,
organisation, memory aids, managing stress)
· Using computers and e-learning to support learning (e.g. the
VLE, Internet search techniques)
· Key research skills/data collection methods (e.g. primary and
secondary sources, interview, questionnaire, observation, focus
groups, questionnaire design, sampling methods)
· Presentation of data using charts, diagrams and graphs.
· Measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode)
· Using word-processing software (e.g. creating tables, using a
variety of document templates for reports, minutes, CVs etc.,
outline numbering, applying styles, automatic tables of
contents, referencing, drawing and other toolbars)
· Using spreadsheet software (e.g. using formulae such as min,
max, sum, autosum, autofill, function wizard, relative and
absolute cell referencing, sorting and filtering data, generating
charts from data sets)
· Using presentation software (e.g. slide design, slide masters,
importing images, animation)
· Sharing data and objects between software applications
LEARNING AND TEACHING STRATEGY

Issues relating to the concepts and principles associated with
study/research skills are suited to delivery during weekly
lectures. However, for the exploration of these topics, their
application within the students’ studies and practical experience
of the business software, computer room workshops/tutorials are
the most appropriate strategy. This gives students the
opportunity to integrate the theory and practice of
study/research skills such as referencing, report writing and
questionnaire design/analysis within the business software
context. Furthermore, this module will afford students the
opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning, to be
engaged, independent learners but with the support of their
peers.
The allocation of teaching to deliver the module is:
Activity type
Hours
Percentage
Scheduled learning
50
25%
Independent learning
150
75%
Placement learning
TOTAL
200
100%
ASSESSMENT
Students will undertake the first assignment in groups (except in

cases of exceptional circumstances) Each group will carry out
research (in line with learning objectives 2, 3 and 4) in order to
develop their project brief and supporting project pitch. The
second assignment requires students to complete an individual
report (3000 words) that evaluates the masterclasses that take
place during the first semester. This evaluative and reflective
report will consider how the masterclasses (and supporting
literature, theories and frameworks) have impacted the carrying
out of the project, as well as the students own personal learning
and development. This second assignment allows students an
opportunity to address all learning outcomes.
Assessment Component 1 – 25%
Students will (in groups) carry out research using published
literature (and if appropriate primary research) in order to
develop a project brief. This project brief should include a
rationale for the project that is grounded in current and credible
literature and / or primary data. The project brief should also
include a high level implementation plan for the project that
includes timeframes and major milestones, as well as the
overarching aims and objectives of the project. The project brief
will take the form of a written report and should not exceed
1000 words.
In support of this project brief, students should also prepare a
presentation to ‘pitch’ their project idea to a panel of academic
staff. This will be a group presentation and should utilise some
form of presentation software. The presentation should be a
minimum of five minutes, but will not exceed ten minutes.
Students should also be prepared to field additional questions
from the staff they are presenting to.
Assessment Component 2 – 75%
This assessment requires the student to produce a reflective and

evaluative management report (maximum 3000 words). This
assessment will provide students an opportunity to utilise all of
the skills and techniques that they have developed across the
Academic Skills module, as well as put their theoretical
knowledge into practice.
Over the course of the first semester, students will attend
weekly masterclass sessions that will impact and inform the
implementation of their project. The report requires students to
reflect on, and evaluate these masterclass sessions in relation to
their project, as well as address the current literature that
supports the themes and issues discussed during these
masterclass sessions. Students should reflect on the impact that
the masterclass sessions had on the implementation of their
project, as well as consider how these sessions influenced their
personal learning and development. As part of this reflection,
students should also include recommendations for how they
would improve a similar project in future, as well as enhance
their own personal skills and competences.
Assessment Summary
Activity type
Percentage
Written
Coursework
25%
Practical
75%
TOTAL
100%

EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (ESD)
Does the module contribute to ESD?
Yes
The whole module introduces the sustainability in business and
management concept.
Module themes include social impacts, changing and innovating
management practices and case material which will apply to
sustainable development. The concept of business incorporated
embraces Not For Profit, social enterprises and community
enterprises, as well as conventional private enterprise, thereby
opening alternative solutions to problems identified. Students
will be encouraged to apply Bruntland concepts in a creative
manner to recommend a systemic solution incorporating whole
society participation. In practical exercises students will be
challenged to review impacts on global (therefore UNESCO
relevant) and local (therefore the Welsh/local dimension e.g.
Future Generations Wales) business practices. Generic and
transferable skills will be developed in students for research,
team approaches and use of consultation tools, in their problem
evaluation and response sessions. Their individual role as
agents of change and advocates for sustainable development
will be explored in academic discipline training, use for case
and stimuli material and in interactive collaborative teaching
and assessment delivery. Students from higher levels will be
invited to demonstrate higher level skills in support for the
module to raise the expectation of achievement and sustainable
study and employability opportunities. This module also acts as
a stimulus for the following Community Engagement module,
which it underpins with contributions for employer, social
activists and community project work or volunteering

opportunities
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Essential
Andrews, J. (2010) Jump Right In! Essential Computer Skills
Using Microsoft Office 2010, Pearson: Harlow
Cottrell, S. (2013) Study Skills Handbook, 4th Ed., Palgrave
Macmillan: Basingstoke
Wilson, J. (2014) Essentials of Business Research: A Guide to
Doing Your Research Project, 2nd Ed Sage: London
Recommended
Cottrell, S. (2010) Skills for Success: The Personal
Development Planning Handbook. 2nd Ed. (Palgrave Study
Guides), Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke
McMillan, K. & Weyers, J. (2007) The Smarter Student: Study
Skills & Strategies for Success at University, Prentice Hall:
Harlow
Piscitelli, S.V. (2014) Study Skills: Do I Really Need This
Stuff? 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall: Harlow
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2012) Research
Methods for Business Students, 6th Edition, FT/Prentice Hall:
Harlow. On-line access on 6th Edition
.
Background
Cox, J., Frye C. & Preppernau, J. (2010) Microsoft Office Home

and Student 2010 Step by Step Book/CD Package. On-line
access only
Journals
International Journal of Educational Development
International Journal of Training & Development
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Computers & Education
Websites
www.skills4study.com/
www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.php
www.palgrave.com/skills4study/
www.ltscotland.org.uk/studyskills/
www.how-to-study.com/
www.brunel.ac.uk/~mastmmg/ssguide/sshome.htm
RESULT
BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme:
BA Business, Finance and Management
Module:
Academic Skills
Module Level (4, 5, 6):
4

Module code:
M4X01434
Contribution to Overall
Module Assessment (%):
25%
Lecturer:
Gareth Hughes
Internal Verifier:
Beth Cummings
Assignment Title:
Project Pitch
Assignment No (x of x):
1 of 2
Hand Out Date:
W/C 3rd October 2017
Submission deadline:
30th October 2017
Referencing:
In the main body of your submission you must give credit to
authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your
submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles,
etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this
assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year
of publication,title of book, edition, publisher: place of
publication).
Disclosure:
I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I
have acknowledged all materials used from the published or
unpublished works of other people. All references have been
duly cited.
Student’s Signature:
Assignments will not be accepted without a signature here

Date:
Turnitin: Lecturer totick to indicate if an electronic version of
the assignment must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: the
Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt
for the student. Both electronic and paper versions MUST be
submitted by the same deadline. No marks will be released
until both submissions are received. Late submission of either
the electronic or paper version will result in a late penalty mark.
Penalties for late submission: Up to one week late, maximum
mark of 40%. Over one week late, Refer. Only Year Tutors and
the Programme Director may grant an extension.
YES
NO
Learning Outcomes tested
(from module syllabus)
Assessment CriteriaTo achieve each outcome a student must
demonstrate the ability to:
methods.
· Source and select a range of literature sources, which may be
academic, professional, governmental, and retrieved
independently

· Analyse the literature
· Use literature sources that are relevant, current and credible.
· Produce a written report in a suitable format, structured and
sectioned appropriately. (in groups)
· Present to staff using appropriate presentation software,
demonstrating ability to convey information and analysis.
· Employ an appropriate system of referencing to evidence
research.
· Use a range of word processing software features (e.g. e-
Referencing, automatic TOC, tables) in the production of the
report
·
TASK DESCRIPTION
reflection. This module aims to provide you with the underlying
study/research strategies and software skills that can accelerate
that learning process. You are encouraged to develop a
reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and to take
responsibility for your own learning. Such skills promote a
deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout the
programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the
Students will (in groups) carry out research using published
literature (and if appropriate primary research) in order to
develop a project brief. This project brief should include a
rationale for the project that is grounded in current and credible
literature and / or primary data. The project brief should also
include a high level implementation plan for the project that
includes timeframes and major milestones, as well as the
overarching aims and objectives of the project. The project brief
will take the form of a written report and should not exceed
1000 words. Any literature should be relevant, credible and
current and sourced from a variety of different resources. The

production of the report will require IT skills, secondary
research, critical thinking, academic skills such as referencing
and report writing conventions.
Each Student will research and prepare no more than 1,000
words on chosen project. The outcome should be ONE
management report, incorporating the contributions of each
team member (where relevant) and members will also contribute
to the collation/structure of the report (for example, the writing
of the introduction, conclusion and bibliographic sections).
In support of this project brief, students should also prepare a
group presentation to ‘pitch’ their project idea to academic
staff. This will be a group presentation and should utilise some
form of presentation software. The presentation should be a
minimum of five minutes, but will not exceed 10 minutes.
Students should also be prepared to field additional questions
from the staff they are presenting to.
Students will use PowerPoint (or alternative presentation
software) to support your pitch, demonstrating an ability to
distil information and convey issues in a clear, concise and
professional manner.
Students also should submit copies of presentation slides and
any handout materials.
GUIDANCE FOR Students IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five
common assessment criteria overleaf.

1. Research-informed Literature
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly
material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set. You
should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of
sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial;
these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks,
current news articles, organisational documents, and websites.
You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic
journals are normally highly credible sources while websites
require careful consideration/selection and should be used
sparingly. Any sources you use should be current and up-to-
date, typically published within the last five years or so, though
seminal works in the field may be older. You must provide
evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work,
using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a
reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please
use the Harvard referencing system.
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your
knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying
principles associated with the subject area. Knowledge relates
to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through
your learning. You demonstrate your understanding by
interpreting the meaning of the facts and information
(knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in
your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc.
appropriate to the task(s) set. You should be able to explain the
theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your
understanding. Your mark/grade will also depend upon the
extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and
understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed,
with comprehensive coverage.
3. Analysis
Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical

thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and
break information down into parts, make inferences, compile,
compare and contrast information. This means not just
describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who?
Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your
arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected
upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you
providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work.
Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to
make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data
and concepts. Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must
be derived from the content of your work. There should be no
new information presented within your conclusion. Where
relevant, alternative solutions and recommendations may be
proposed.
4. Practical Application and Deployment
You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related
concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular
context. How do they work in practice? You will deploy
models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to
assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or
solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative
and creative. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of
real world examples and cases, the application of a model
within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation
against others based on stated criteria. You should show
awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when
applied in particular contexts.
5. Skills for Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in
professional practice. This includes demonstrating your
individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must
communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be
written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report,

presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in
presentation and organisation.
Essential Resources:
· Resources listed on the lecture schedule and on Moodle
· The student handbook
marking criteria and Student FEEDBACK
This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which
these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks
available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the
space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s),
including those areas in which you have performed well and
areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Page 9 of 19
Common Assessment Criteria Applied
Marks available
Marks
awarded
Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible
sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions.
10

Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and
underlying principles associated with the discipline.
10
3. Analysis
Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and
judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and
evidence
30

Deployment of methods, materials, tools and techniques;
application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative
solutions to solve problems.
20
Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative
working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and
organisation.
30
Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification

at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give
feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they
are confirmed. )
Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate)
%
Up to one-week late
Over one week late
COMMON ASSESSMENT AND MARKING CRITERIA
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
Assessment Criteria
0-29%
30-39%*
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions

Little or no evidence of reading.
Views and findings unsupported and non-authoritative.
Referencing conventions largely ignored.
Poor evidence of reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate
sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources.
Referencing conventions used inconsistently.
References to a limited range of mostly relevant sources. Some
omissions and minor errors.
Referencing conventions evident though not always applied
consistently.
Inclusion of a range of research-informed literature, including
sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions
mostly consistently applied.
Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed literature,
including sources retrieved independently.
Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of
referencing conventions, consistently applied.
A comprehensive range of research informed literature
embedded in the work. Excellent selection of relevant and
credible sources. High-level referencing skills, consistently
applied.
Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature
embedded in the work. Outstanding selection of relevant and
credible sources. High-level referencing skills consistently and
professionally applied.
Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this
level. Substantial inaccuracies.
Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial understanding. Some
significant inaccuracies.
Evidence of basic knowledge and understanding of the relevant
concepts and underlying principles.
Knowledge is accurate with a good understanding of the field of
study.

Knowledge is extensive. Exhibits understanding of the breadth
and depth of established views.
Excellent knowledge and understanding of the main concepts
and key theories. Clear awareness of challenges to established
views and the limitations of the knowledge base.
Highly detailed knowledge and understanding of the main
theories/concepts, and a critical awareness of the ambiguities
and limitations of knowledge.
3. Analysis
evidence
Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any
credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/
missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise
or evaluate.
Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most
part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and
contradictory. Generalised statements made with scant evidence.
Conclusions lack relevance.
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and some attempts
to synthesise, albeit with some weaknesses.
Some evidence to support findings/ views, but evidence not
consistently interpreted.
Some relevant conclusions and recommendations, where
relevant
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis.
Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without
guidance.
An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use
evidence to support the argument.
Valid conclusions and recommendations, where relevant
Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation.
Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to
review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence.
Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and

convincingly.
Sound, convincing conclusions / recommendations.
Thoroughly logical work, supported by evaluated evidence.
High quality analysis, developed independently or through
effective collaboration.
Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify
reasons for contradictions.
Strong, persuasive, conclusions, justifiable recommendations.
Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence.
Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through
Highly persuasive conclusions
Effective deployment of appropriate methods, materials, tools
and techniques; extent of skill demonstrated in the application
of concepts to a variety of processes and/or contexts;
formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve
problems.
Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or
techniques.
Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.
Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or
techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed
appreciation of the context of the application.
An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of
well established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Basic appreciation of the context of the application.
A good and appropriate application of standard methods,
materials, tools and/or techniques.
Good appreciation of the context of the application, with some
use of examples, where relevant.

A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools
and/or techniques.
Very good consideration of the context of the application, with
perceptive use of examples, where relevant.
Evidence of some innovation and creativity.
An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools
and/or techniques.
The context of the application is well considered, with
extensive use of relevant examples.
Application and deployment extend beyond established
conventions. Innovation and creativity evident throughout.
Outstanding levels of application and deployment skills.
Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and
techniques.
Demonstrates attributes expected in professional practice
including: individual initiative and collaborative working;
deployment of appropriate media to communicate (including
written and oral); clarity and effectiveness in presentation and
organisation.
Communication media is inappropriate or misapplied.
Little or no evidence of autonomy in the completion of tasks.
Work is poorly structured and/or largely incoherent.
Media is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.
Poor independent or collaborative initiative.
Work lacks structure, organisation, and/or coherence
Can communicate in a suitable format but with some room for
improvement.
Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in
group activities.
Work lacks coherence in places and could be better structured.
Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have
minor errors.
Can work effectively as part of a team, with clear contribution
to group activities.

Mostly coherent work and is in a suitable structure.
Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a
suitable format.
Can work very well as part of a team, with very good
contribution to group activities.
Work is coherent and fluent and is well structured and
organised.
Can communicate professionally and, confidently in a suitable
format.
Can work professionally within a team, showing leadership
skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting
obligations.
Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.
Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of
professionalism.
Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team,
showing advanced leadership skills.
Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented
professionally.
Student Self Evaluation Form
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme:
Year of programme
Assignment Title:
This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria
detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are
demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these

criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement
you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
Page 11 of 19
Level of Achievement
REFER
3rd
2:2
2:1
1st
1st
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%

70-79%
80-100%
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
3. Analysis
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%

0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%

PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL
THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS you feel that you need TO
DEVELOP
Student’s Name
Date
Student’s Signature

RESULT
BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme:
BA Business and Management
Module:
Academic Skills
Module Level (4, 5, 6):
4
Module code:
M4X01434
SBUS4108
Contribution to Overall
Module Assessment (%):
75%
Lecturer:
Gareth Hughes
Internal Verifier:
Beth Cummings
Assignment Title:
Reflective Report
Assignment No (x of x):
2 of 2
Hand Out Date:
W/C 3rd October 2017
Submission deadline:
2nd March 2018

Referencing:
In the main body of your submission you must give credit to
authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your
submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles,
etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this
assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year
of publication,title of book, edition, publisher: place of
publication).
Disclosure:
I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I
have acknowledged all materials used from the published or
unpublished works of other people. All references have been
duly cited.
Student’s Signature:
Assignments will not be accepted without a signature here
Date:
Turnitin: Lecturer totick to indicate if an electronic version of
the assignment must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: the
Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt
for the student. Both electronic and paper versions MUST be
submitted by the same deadline. No marks will be released
until both submissions are received. Late submission of either
the electronic or paper version will result in a late penalty mark.
Penalties for late submission: Up to one week late, maximum
mark of 40%. Over one week late, Refer. Only Year Tutors and
the Programme Director may grant an extension.
YES
NO

Learning Outcomes tested
(from module syllabus)
Assessment CriteriaTo achieve each outcome a student must
demonstrate the ability to:
methods.
· Attendance of masterclasses is essential and mandatory to
meet the learning objectives of this module
· Students will need to evaluate and reflect on the masterclasses
in relation to their project work (i.e. how these masterclasses
impacted and informed the implementation of their project)
· Address literature that is related to the themes and issues that
are discussed in the masterclasses and compare and contrast this
with their own experience during the course of the project.
· Employ an appropriate system of referencing to evidence
research.
· Make recommendations as to how students could improve
future project work
· Reflect on personal strengths and weaknesses and address how
these can be developed and mitigated respectively, in future
TASK DESCRIPTION
reflection. This module aims to provide you with the underlying
study/research strategies and software skills that can accelerate

that learning process. You are encouraged to develop a
reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and to take
responsibility for your own learning. Such skills promote a
deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout the
programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the
This assessment requires the student to produce a reflective and
evaluative management report (maximum 3000 words) (N.B this
is an individual piece of work). This assessment will provide
students an opportunity to utilise all of the skills and techniques
that they have developed across the Academic Skills module, as
well as put their theoretical knowledge into practice.
Over the course of the first semester, students will attend
weekly masterclass sessions that will impact and inform the
implementation of their project. The report requires students to
reflect on, and evaluate these masterclass sessions in relation to
their project, as well as address the current literature that
supports the themes and issues discussed during these
masterclass sessions. Students should reflect on the impact that
the masterclass sessions had on the implementation of their
project, as well as consider how these sessions influenced their
personal learning and development. As part of this reflection,
students should also include recommendations for how they
would improve a similar project in future, as well as enhance
their own personal skills and competences.
Please note, attendance of masterclass sessions is compulsory
and essential to success in this module. Students should ensure
that they keep detailed notes during the masterclasses, in order
to be able to fully reflect on how these sessions informed and
impacted the conduct of their projects. Further to which,
students should ensure that they conduct further research around
the themes and issues addressed in the masterclasses in order
that they can demonstrate both an academic and practical

understanding of these issues, as well as understand the broader
context in which they sit.
GUIDANCE FOR Students IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five
common assessment criteria overleaf.
Research-informed Literature
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly
material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set. You
should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of
sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial;
these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks,
current news articles, organisational documents, and websites.
You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic
journals are normally highly credible sources while websites
require careful consideration/selection and should be used
sparingly. Any sources you use should be current and up-to-
date, typically published within the last five years or so, though
seminal works in the field may be older. You must provide
evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work,
using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a
reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please
use the Harvard referencing system.
Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your
knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying
principles associated with the subject area. Knowledge relates
to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through
your learning. You demonstrate your understanding by
interpreting the meaning of the facts and information
(knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in
your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc.

appropriate to the task(s) set. You should be able to explain the
theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your
understanding. Your mark/grade will also depend upon the
extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and
understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed,
with comprehensive coverage.
Analysis
Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical
thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and
break information down into parts, make inferences, compile,
compare and contrast information. This means not just
describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who?
Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your
arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected
upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you
providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work.
Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to
make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data
and concepts. Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must
be derived from the content of your work. There should be no
new information presented within your conclusion. Where
relevant; alternative solutions and recommendations may be
proposed.
Practical Application and Deployment
You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related
concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular
context. How do they work in practice? You will deploy
models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to
assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or
solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative
and creative. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of
real world examples and cases, the application of a model
within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation
against others based on stated criteria. You should show

awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when
applied in particular contexts.
Skills for Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in
professional practice. This includes demonstrating your
individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must
communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be
written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report,
presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in
presentation and organisation.
Essential Resources:
· Resources listed on the lecture schedule and on Moodle
· The student handbook
marking criteria and Student FEEDBACK
This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which
these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks
available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the
space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s),
including those areas in which you have performed well and
areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Page 16 of 19
Marks available
Marks
awarded
sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions.

20
20
3. Analysis
evidence
20
Deployment of methods, materials, tools and techniques;
application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative
solutions to solve problems.

20
Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative
working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and
organisation.
20
Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification
at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give
feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they
are confirmed. )
Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate)
%
Up to one-week late
Over one week late

COMMON ASSESSMENT AND MARKING CRITERIA
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
Assessment Criteria
0-29%
30-39%*
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions
Little or no evidence of reading.
Views and findings unsupported and non-authoritative.
Referencing conventions largely ignored.
Poor evidence of reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate
sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources.
Referencing conventions used inconsistently.
References to a limited range of mostly relevant sources. Some
omissions and minor errors.
Referencing conventions evident though not always applied

consistently.
Inclusion of a range of research-informed literature, including
sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions
mostly consistently applied.
Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed literature,
including sources retrieved independently.
Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of
referencing conventions, consistently applied.
A comprehensive range of research informed literature
embedded in the work. Excellent selection of relevant and
credible sources. High-level referencing skills, consistently
applied.
Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature
embedded in the work. Outstanding selection of relevant and
credible sources. High-level referencing skills consistently and
professionally applied.
Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this
level. Substantial inaccuracies.
Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial understanding. Some
significant inaccuracies.
Evidence of basic knowledge and understanding of the relevant
concepts and underlying principles.
Knowledge is accurate with a good understanding of the field of
study.
Knowledge is extensive. Exhibits understanding of the breadth
and depth of established views.
Excellent knowledge and understanding of the main concepts
and key theories. Clear awareness of challenges to established
views and the limitations of the knowledge base.
Highly detailed knowledge and understanding of the main
theories/concepts, and a critical awareness of the ambiguities
and limitations of knowledge.
3. Analysis

evidence
Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any
credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/
missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise
or evaluate.
Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most
part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and
contradictory. Generalised statements made with scant evidence.
Conclusions lack relevance.
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and some attempts
to synthesise, albeit with some weaknesses.
Some evidence to support findings/ views, but evidence not
consistently interpreted.
Some relevant conclusions and recommendations, where
relevant
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis.
Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without
guidance.
An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use
evidence to support the argument.
Valid conclusions and recommendations, where relevant
Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation.
Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to
review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence.
Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and
convincingly.
Sound, convincing conclusions / recommendations.
Thoroughly logical work, supported by evaluated evidence.
High quality analysis, developed independently or through
Strong, persuasive, conclusions, justifiable recommendations.
Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence.

Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through
Highly persuasive conclusions
Effective deployment of appropriate methods, materials, tools
and techniques; extent of skill demonstrated in the application
of concepts to a variety of processes and/or contexts;
formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve
problems.
Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or
techniques.
Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.
Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or
techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed
appreciation of the context of the application.
An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of
well established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Basic appreciation of the context of the application.
A good and appropriate application of standard methods,
materials, tools and/or techniques.
Good appreciation of the context of the application, with some
use of examples, where relevant.
A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools
and/or techniques.
Very good consideration of the context of the application, with
perceptive use of examples, where relevant.
Evidence of some innovation and creativity.
An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools
and/or techniques.
The context of the application is well considered, with

extensive use of relevant examples.
Application and deployment extend beyond established
conventions. Innovation and creativity evident throughout.
Outstanding levels of application and deployment skills.
Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and
techniques.
Demonstrates attributes expected in professional practice
including: individual initiative and collaborative working;
deployment of appropriate media to communicate (including
written and oral); clarity and effectiveness in presentation and
organisation.
Communication media is inappropriate or misapplied.
Little or no evidence of autonomy in the completion of tasks.
Work is poorly structured and/or largely incoherent.
Media is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.
Poor independent or collaborative initiative.
Work lacks structure, organisation, and/or coherence
Can communicate in a suitable format but with some room for
improvement.
Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in
group activities.
Work lacks coherence in places and could be better structured.
Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have
minor errors.
Can work effectively as part of a team, with clear contribution
to group activities.
Mostly coherent work and is in a suitable structure.
Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a
suitable format.
Can work very well as part of a team, with very good
contribution to group activities.
Work is coherent and fluent and is well structured and
organised.
Can communicate professionally and, confidently in a suitable
format.

Can work professionally within a team, showing leadership
skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting
obligations.
Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.
Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of
professionalism.
Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team,
showing advanced leadership skills.
Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented
professionally.
Student Self Evaluation Form
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme:
Year of programme
Assignment Title:
This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria
detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are
demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these
criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement
you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
Page 19 of 19
Level of Achievement

REFER
3rd
2:2
2:1
1st
1st
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%

0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
3. Analysis
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%

0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL
THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS you feel that you need TO

DEVELOP
Student’s Name
Date
Student’s Signature
PSY 3211 Article Critique Self-Rating Rubric
You will get 10 points for filling out and submitting this along
with your article critique paper. The purpose of this is for you
to reflect on the quality of your paper. This is due on the same
day that the article critique is due.
Place your rating for each category below, then add your ratings
for each category at the bottom where it says “total”. For
example, if you believe that your description of the kind of
study deserves 3 out of 4 points (because you know your
explanation is not sufficient), it should look like this: “your
rating: 3” Please write your ratings in a different color font so
that they are easier to see.
Please put effort into your ratings. Do not simply give yourself
a 50/50. Really reflect on the quality of your paper and whether
you meet all the criteria listed. If it is clear that you have not
reflected sufficiently on your paper (e.g., you give a rating of

2/2 for something that is actually missing form your paper), you
will lose points.
We will use this very same rubric when we grade your paper!
This does not mean that you are guaranteed to get the grade you
give yourself, but it should help to minimize any surprises when
you get your grade.
Title page (4 points total)
Your Rating:
Header
a) Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with
a lower case h)? Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL
CAPS? oes your header on this second page omit the phrase
“Running head”—1 point
b) Is everything in your paper in 12 point Times New Roman
font?---1 points
c) Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12
point Times New Roman font)? ----0.5 points
Title / Name / Institution
d) Do all title words with four letters or more start with a
capital letter?--- 0.5 points
e) Are your name and institution correct? Are your title, name,
and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times New
Roman font? ---1 points
Total for Title Page (add up your ratings for a-e):
Summary of the Article (14 points total)
Your Rating:
General Format and Header

f) Is your header title present and identical to your header title
on the title page? ---1 points
g) Does your summary have min 1 and half page and max 3
pages? ---2 points
Summary of the Article
h) Does your summary note the type of design (experimental vs.
correlational)? ---2 points
i) Does your summary note the independent variables? ---2
points
j) Does your summary note dependent variables? ---2 points
k) Does your summary describe the methods for the article,
including participants, measurement, methodology, and
procedure? ---3 points
l) Does your summary describe the findings? ---2 points
Total for Summary (add up your ratings for f-l):
Your Rating:
Critique of the Article (16 points total)
Does your critique identify at least four of the needed elements
(validity and reliability, interpreting findings, ethics, follow-up
study, weak vs strong results, implications not mentioned in the
article, theory problems, why the methods used are better or
worse than alternatives ---Each element is worth 4 points, and
must include sufficient detail and explanation.
Total for Critique (add up your ratings for each of the 4
critiques)

Your Rating:
Brief Summary (6 points total)
m) Do you summarize the article in one to two paragraphs? ---1
points
n) Does your brief summary highlight the main article points
(hypotheses, method, and subjects)? ---3 points
o) Does your brief summary highlight the conclusions drawn by
authors? ---2 points
Total for Brief Summary (add up your ratings for m-o):
In-text Citations and References Page (4 points total)
Your Rating:
In-text Citation
p) Are in-text citations (including direct quotations) in APA
format? ---2 points
References
q) Are your references in APA format? ---2 points
Total for Brief Summary (add up your ratings for p & q):
Grammar and Writing Quality (6 points total)
Check your grammar and writing for the entire paper. Make sure
to proof read, and cite & paraphrase properly. Avoid personal
pronouns like "us", "we", "you", and "I". For a scientific paper
like this, go with more objective words like "people",
"participants", "users", or "viewers" etc.
If your paper lacks originality and contains too much overlap

with the paper you are summarizing (i.e. you do not paraphrase
appropriately or cite your sources properly), you will lose some
or all of the points from writing quality, depending on the
extent of the overlap with the paper. For example, if sentences
contain only one or two words changed from a sentence in the
original paper, you will lose points from writing quality.
Your Rating for Writing Quality:
Your Total Grade: /50 points (add up all “total
ratings” above from each of the 6 categories to get your total
self-grade).
Running head: ARTICLE CRITIQUE INSTRUCTIONS 1
ARTICLE CRITIQUE INSTRUCTIONS 2
Article Critique Instructions (60 points possible)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Purpose of The Article Critique Paper
1). Psychological Purpose
This paper serves several purposes, the first of which is helping
you gain insight into research papers in psychology. As this
may be your first time reading and writing papers in
psychology, one goal of Paper I is to give you insight into what
goes into such papers. This article critique paper will help you
learn about the various sections of an empirical research report

by reading at least one peer-reviewed articles (articles that have
a Title Page, Abstract*, Literature Review, Methods Section,
Results Section, and References Page—I have already selected
some articles for you to critique, so make sure you only critique
one in the folder provided on Canvas) This paper will also give
you some insights into how the results sections are written in
APA formatted research articles. Pay close attention to those
sections, as throughout this course you’ll be writing up some
results of your own!
In this relatively short paper, you will read one of five articles
posted on Canvas and summarize what the authors did and what
they found. The first part of the paper should focus on
summarizing the design the authors used for their project. That
is, you will identify the independent and dependent variables,
talk about how the authors carried out their study, and then
summarize the results (you don’t need to fully understand the
statistics in the results, but try to get a sense of what the
authors did in their analyses). In the second part of the paper,
you will critique the article for its methodological strengths and
weaknesses. Finally, in part three, you will provide your
references for the Article Critique Paper in APA format.
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of the Article Critique paper is to teach you
proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting.
In the instructions below, I tell you how to format your paper
using APA style. There are a lot of very specific requirements
in APA papers, so pay attention to the instructions below as
well as Chapter 14 in your textbook! I highly recommend using
the Paper I Checklist before submitting your paper, as it will
help walk you through the picky nuances of APA formatting.
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you grow as a writer. Few
psychology classes give you the chance to write papers and
receive feedback on your work. This class will! We will give
you feedback on this paper in terms of content, spelling, and
grammar.

Article Critique Paper (60 points possible)
Each student is required to write an article critique paper based
on one of the research articles present on Canvas only those
articles listed on Canvas can be critiqued – if you critique a
different article, it will not be graded). If you are unclear about
any of this information, please ask.
What is an article critique paper?
An article critique is a written communication that conveys your
understanding of a research article and how it relates to the
conceptual issues of interest to this course.
This article critique paper will include 5 things:
1. Title page: 1 page (4 points)
· Use APA style to present the appropriate information:
· A Running head must be included and formatted APA style
· The phrase “Running head” is at the top of the title page
followed by a short title of your creation (no more than 50
characters) that is in ALL CAPS. This running head is left-
justified (flush left on the page). Note that the “h” in head is all
lower case! Look at the first page of these instructions, and you
will see how to set up your Running head.
· There must be a page number on the title page that is right
justified. It is included in the header
· Your paper title appears on the title page. This is usually 12
words or less, and the first letter of each word is capitalized. It
should be descriptive of the paper (For this paper, you should
use the title of the article you are critiquing. The paper title can
be the same title as in the Running head or it can differ – your
choice)
· Your name will appear on the title page
· Your institution will appear on the title page as well

· For all papers, make sure to double-space EVERYTHING and
use Times New Roman font. This includes everything from the
title page through the references.
· This is standard APA format. ALL of your future papers will
include a similar title page
2. Summary of the Article: 1 ½ page minimum, 3 pages
maximum - 14 points)
An article critique should briefly summarize, in your own
words, the article research question and how it was addressed in
the article. Below are some things to include in your summary.
· The summary itself will include the following: (Note – if the
article involved more than one experiment, you can either
choose to focus on one of the studies specifically or summarize
the general design for all of the studies)
1. Type of study (Was it experimental or correlational? How do
you know?)
2. Variables (What were the independent and dependent
variables? How did they manipulate the IV? How did they
operationally define the DV? Be specific with these. Define the
terms independent and dependent variable and make sure to
identify how they are operationally defined in the article)
3. Method (What did the participants do in the study? How was
it set up? Was there a random sample of participants? Was there
random assignment to groups?). How was data collected (online,
in person, in a laboratory?).
4. Summary of findings (What were their findings?)
· Make sure that:
1. The CAPS portion of your running head should also appear
on the first page of your paper, but it will NOT include the
phrase “Running head” this time, only the same title as the
running head from the first paper in ALL CAPS. Again, see the
example paper. There is a powerpoint presentation on using
Microsoft Word that can help you figure out how to have a
different header on the title page (where “Running head” is
present) and other pages in the paper (where “Running head” is

NOT present). You can also find how-to information like this
using youtube!
2. If you look at the header in pages 2 through 5 (including
THIS current page 4 that you are reading right now!), you will
see “Running head” omitted. It simply has the short title
(ARTICLE CRITIQUE PAPER INSTRUCTIONS) all in caps,
followed by the page number.
3. The same title used on the title page should be at the top of
the page on the first actual line of the paper, centered.
4. For this paper, add the word “Summary” below the title, and
have it flush left. Then write your summary of the article below
that.
3. Critique of the study: 1 ½ pages minimum - 3 pages
maximum - 16 points)
1. This portion of the article critique assignment focuses on
your own thoughts about the content of the article (i.e. your
own ideas in your own words). For this section, please use the
word “Critique” below the last sentence in your summary, and
have the word “Critique” flush left.
1. This section is a bit harder, but there are a number of ways to
demonstrate critical thinking in your writing. Address at least
four of the following elements. You can address more than four,
but four is the minimum.
· 1). In your opinion, are there any confounding variables in the
study (these could be extraneous variables or nuisance
variables)? If so, explain what the confound is and specifically
how it is impacting the results of the study. A sufficient
explanation of this will include at least one paragraph of
writing.
· 2). Is the sample used in the study an appropriate sample? Is
the sample representative of the population? Could the study be
replicated if it were done again? Why or why not?
· 3). Did they measure the dependent variable in a way that is
valid? Be sure to explain what validity is, and why you believe

the dependent variable was or was not measured in a way that
was valid.
· 4). Did the study authors correctly interpret their findings, or
are there any alternative interpretations you can think of?
· 5). Did the authors of the study employ appropriate ethical
safeguards?
· 6). Briefly describe a follow-up study you might design that
builds on the findings of the study you read how the research
presented in the article relates to research, articles or material
covered in other sections of the course
· 7). Describe whether you feel the results presented in the
article are weaker or stronger than the authors claim (and why);
or discuss alternative interpretations of the results (i.e.
something not mentioned by the authors) and/or what research
might provide a test between the proposed and alternate
interpretations
· 8). Mention additional implications of the findings not
mentioned in the article (either theoretical or practical/applied)
· 9). Identify specific problems in the theory, discussion or
empirical research presented in the article and how these
problems could be corrected. If the problems you discuss are
methodological in nature, then they must be issues that are
substantial enough to affect the interpretations of the findings
or arguments presented in the article. Furthermore, for
methodological problems, you must justify not only why
something is problematic but also how it could be resolved and
why your proposed solution would be preferable.
· 10). Describe how/why the method used in the article is either
better or worse for addressing a particular issue than other
methods
4. Brief summary of the article: One or paragraphs (6 points)
· Write the words “Brief Summary”, and then begin the brief
summary below this
· In ONE or TWO paragraphs maximum, summarize the article
again, but this time I want it to be very short. In other words,

take all of the information that you talked about in the summary
portion of this assignment and write it again, but this time in
only a few sentences.
· The reason for this section is that I want to make sure you can
understand the whole study but that you can also write about it
in a shorter paragraph that still emphasizes the main points of
the article. Pretend that you are writing your own literature
review for a research study, and you need to get the gist of an
article that you read that helps support your own research across
to your reader. Make sure to cite the original study (the article
you are critiquing).
5. References – 1 page (4 points)
· Provide the reference for this article in proper APA format
(see the book Chapter 14 for appropriate referencing guidelines
or the Chapter 14 powerpoint).
· If you cited other sources during either your critique or
summary, reference them as well (though you do not need to
cite other sources in this assignment – this is merely optional IF
you happen to bring in other sources). Formatting counts here,
so make sure to italicize where appropriate and watch which
words you are capitalizing!
6. Grammar and Writing Quality (6 points)
· Few psychology courses are as writing intensive as Research
Methods (especially Research Methods Two next semester!). As
such, I want to make sure that you develop writing skills early.
This is something that needs special attention, so make sure to
proofread your papers carefully.
· Avoid run-on sentences, sentence fragments, spelling errors,
and grammar errors. Writing quality will become more
important in future papers, but this is where you should start to
hone your writing skills.
· We will give you feedback on your papers, but I recommend
seeking some help from the FIU writing center to make sure
your paper is clear, precise, and covers all needed material. I

also recommend asking a few of your group members to read
over your paper and make suggestions. You can do the same for
them!
· If your paper lacks originality and contains too much overlap
with the paper you are summarizing (i.e. you do not paraphrase
appropriately or cite your sources properly), you will lose some
or all of the points from writing quality, depending on the
extent of the overlap with the paper. For example, if sentences
contain only one or two words changed from a sentence in the
original paper, you will lose points from writing quality.
Please note that you do not need to refer to any other sources
other than the article on which you have chosen to write your
paper. However, you are welcome to refer to additional sources
if you choose.
7. Self-Rating Rubric (10 points). On canvas, you will find a
self-rating rubric. This rubric contains a summary of all the
points available to you in this paper. You must submit your
ratings for your own paper, using this rubric (essentially, you’ll
grade your own paper before you hand it in). You will upload
your completed rubric to the “article critique rubric” assignment
on Canvas.
· Please put effort into your ratings. Do not simply give
yourself a 50/50. Really reflect on the quality of your paper and
whether you meet all the criteria listed.
1. If it is clear that you have not reflected sufficiently on your
paper (e.g., you give a rating of 2/2 for something that is not
included in your paper), you will lose points.
· This does not mean that you are guaranteed whatever grade
you give to yourself. Instead, this will help you to 1) make sure
that you have included everything you need to include, and 2)
help you to reflect on your own writing.
· In fact, we will use this very same rubric when we grade your
paper, so you should know exactly what to expect for your
grade!

Other guidelines for the article critique papers
1. 1). Pay attention to the page length requirements – 1 page for
the title page, 1.5 pages to 3 pages for the summary, 1.5 pages
to 3 pages for the critique, one or two paragraphs for the brief
summary, and 1 page for the references page. If you are under
the minimum, we will deduct points. If you go over the
maximum, we are a little more flexible (you can go over by half
page or so), but we want you to try to keep it to the maximum
page.
1. 2). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set one inch
on all sides. You must use 12-point Times New Roman font.
1. 3). As a general rule, ALL paragraphs and sentences are
double spaced in APA papers. It even includes the references,
so make sure to double space EVERYTHING
1. 4). When summarizing the article in your own words, you
need not continually cite the article throughout the rest of your
critique. Nonetheless, you should follow proper referencing
procedures, which means that:
3. If you are inserting a direct quote from any source, it must be
enclosed in quotations and followed by a parenthetical reference
to the source. “Let’s say I am directly quoting this current
sentence and the next. I would then cite it with the author name,
date of publication, and the page number for the direct quote”
(Winter, 2013, p . 4).
0. Note: We will deduct points if you quote more than once per
page, so keep quotes to a minimum. Paraphrase instead, but
make sure you still give the original author credit for the
material by citing him or using the author’s name (“In this
article, Smith noted that …” or “In this article, the authors
noted that…”)
3. If you choose to reference any source other than your chosen
article, it must be listed in a reference list.
1. 5). Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend
reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or getting

family or friends to read your work. Writing quality will
become more important in future papers, so you should start
working on that now!
If you have any questions about the articles, your ideas, or your
writing, please ask. Although we won’t be able to review entire
drafts of papers before they are handed in, we are very willing
to discuss problems, concerns or issues that you might have.
Running head: DO WEAPONS MAKE PEOPLE AGGRESSIVE?
1
DO WEAPONS MAKE PEOPLE AGGRESSIVE
7
Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli
Jane Doe
Florida International University
Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli
Summary:
Berkowitz and Lepage (1967) designed a study to test the
hypothesis that individuals who are in a state of anger are more
likely to act out their aggression if cues associated with
violence and aggression are present. The sample consisted of
100 male students from the University of Wisconsin who were
all enrolled in an introductory level psychology course.
This study used an experimental research method because it
manipulated the independent variable and presumably involved
random assignment (although this was not stated in the text).
There were two main independent variables. The first one was
the subject’s level of anger and this was determined by whether
the subject was shocked once or seven times. The second
independent variable was the kind of cue present near the shock
button when it was the subject’s turn to evaluate the

confederate. For one group there was no object, in the control
group there was a neutral object (a badminton racquet), and for
the last group there was a gun that was supposedly part of a
different study. This last group was further separated into 2
subgroups with some being told that the gun belonged to the
confederate while others were told that it was left behind by
someone else. These independent variables were then combined
to see how they affected the dependent variable, which was the
level of aggression the subject displayed. The dependent
variable was measured by how many shocks the subject
delivered to the confederate.
The procedure ran as follows: volunteers were told that they
were participating in a study to test the physiological effects of
stress. To do this the subject and the other participant (who
was actually a confederate) were both given a social problem
and they had to think up ways to solve it. After they completed
this task (in separate rooms) their problem solving ideas were
then exchanged so they could evaluate each other. The
evaluation was done by pushing a button that was supposed to
shock the person in the other room (although they still could not
see each other); 1 shock represented the best rating while a
lesser evaluation was communicated through a higher number of
shocks. The confederate was the first to do the evaluation. The
number of shocks given to the actual volunteer was already
determined as 1 or 7 though (depending on the random
assignment) and was not based on a real rating. After this came
the volunteer’s turn to do the same evaluation, but the number
of shocks was not predetermined. Next to the shock button was
one of the previously stated objects, and the gun was the only
cue hypothesized to elicit increased aggression.
The results of this study confirmed the hypothesis. Those
participants who were more angered (given 7 shocks) and were
cued by the violent object (a gun) and told that it belonged to
the person they were rating, outwardly expressed their
aggression the most by giving the confederate a higher number
of shocks. The next highest number of shocks was by the group

in the presence of a gun, but had been told the gun was left
behind by someone else. Those who did not see any objects
gave on average one less shock and the least number of shocks
were given by those in the presence of the badminton racquets.
On the other hand, when the volunteer was not as angered (only
shocked once by the confederate), outward expression of
aggression was relatively low and stable regardless of what type
of cue was present. The researchers used these results to
theorize that a person who is already aroused and is then cued
by a violent object is more likely to have an impulsive reaction
to act more aggressively.
Critique:
Overall this study was well designed in order to test the given
hypothesis that weapons are aggression-eliciting stimuli. The
method of using different objects to induce a given response is
very similar to the proven phenomenon of priming. Priming is
where certain information is more attended to when related cues
are presented. Therefore the results of Berkowitz and Lepage
(1967) make sense because weapons are connected to
aggression, which increases the person’s awareness of his or her
aggressive feelings, and consequently makes the outward act of
aggression more likely.
Based on the results, chances are high that these men would
always act in this way when in a similar situation, so this study
can be considered reliable (that is, it is repeatable). Validity is
not as strong, though. Validity refers to whether the study is
measuring what it purports to measure. When the participant
was already aroused (given 7 shocks) there was a significant
difference in the amount of retaliation depending on which cue
was present. However, this retaliation did not depend on the
cues if the participant was not as initially aroused (only given 1
shock). So how can they be measuring the impact of a priming
mechanism like the gun in the room if they need participants to
already be aroused? I am not sure they are measuring their

variables correctly. That being said, it did show that although
the cues do have an effect on aggressive behavior, initial
aggression level plays a much larger role in the causal
relationship. The ethicalness of this study is also questionable.
Receiving and delivering shocks could potentially cause
physical pain and also have a negative effect on one’s emotional
well-being. Nonetheless, most participants probably did not
suffer any serious consequences. Also, due to the nature of this
specific research question it does not seem like there is another
way to measure aggression that would be anymore ethical.
One major methodological problem that should have been
addressed is the sample that was obtained. The sample used in
this experiment is not a good representation of humans in
general, because it only involved college-aged men. It is
possible that women or people of different ages may respond
differently to the cues. Women are often thought of as less
violent, so their reaction to a negative stimulus might cause
them to deliver fewer shocks. A weapon makes the seriousness
of the situation salient and may cause some people to think
rationally about their behavior in the near future. Clearly this
proposal requires actual testing before making further
assumptions, but it does show the need for a more diverse
sample of participants.
Along the same line as the previous issue, a follow-up study
could more carefully look at the relationship between peoples’
attitudes towards guns (or other weapons) and their
corresponding level of aggressive behavior when given the
chance to retaliate. This would be more of a quasi-experiment
because in order to test the independent variable of attitudes
towards weapons the groups could not be randomly assigned.
Three existing groups would be used; those who support
weapons, those who are against them, and those who feel
neutral (the control group). The hypothesis would predict that
if prior arousal level was high, participants who support
weapons would show increased aggression when cued by the

gun, but the group of participants with negative attitudes
towards guns would not be as aggressive. If the subjects did not
receive prior arousal (if they were only shocked once by their
“evaluator”), then neither group would be significantly affected
by the cues.
Even if initial aggression is a greater cause in inducing violent
behavior than the existence of weapon-related cues, this study
has serious implications for social policies related to gun
control. It is apparent from the results that if someone is angry
and is near a gun, then that person will likely act more
aggressively than he or she typically would. Since the guns in
the experiment were not loaded and the situation was
controlled, the heightened aggression was not transferred over
to actually using the guns. In a private home though, arguments
occurring with a gun nearby might make it more likely that a
gun will be used. Knowing that the mere presence of a weapon
increases violence should urge lawmakers to consider adopting
stricter gun laws.
Brief summary
Berkowitz and Lepage (1967) conducted a study in which they
hypothesized that priming people with an aggressive object (a
gun) would lead them to act aggressively. The authors gave
electrical shocks (from 1 to 7 of them) to 100 male
undergraduates. They told them that one of their peers had
delivered the shock. The participant could then retaliate, but
they did so in the presence of either a gun or a tennis racket
(which was supposedly left in the researcher room from a
different study). Participants given the highest number of
shocks (7) gave higher retaliation shocks to the peer, but this
was more likely when they were in the presence of a gun
(compared to a tennis racket). The authors concluded that the
guns increased aggressive responses from male participants who
were highly aroused.
References

Berkowitz, L., & Lepage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-
eliciting stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
7, 202-207. doi: 10.1037/h0025008

MODULE HANDBOOK BA M4X01434Academic skills.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to MODULE HANDBOOK BA M4X01434Academic skills.docx

Similar to MODULE HANDBOOK BA M4X01434Academic skills.docx (20)

More from audeleypearl

More from audeleypearl (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

MODULE HANDBOOK BA M4X01434Academic skills.docx