Child sexual abuse and cognitive distortions of thinking

Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences

Psychology Department

Assessment Coversheet and Feedback Form

Student Name

Anonymous Marking

Reasonable Adjustments

Student Number

Check this box [x] if the Faculty has notified you that you are eligible for a Reasonable Adjustment (including additional time) in relation to the marking of this assessment. Please note that action may be taken under the University’s Student Disciplinary Procedure against any student making a false claim for Reasonable Adjustments.

Course and Year

Module Code

PSY4031

Module Title

Psychology Research Skills

Module Tutor

Dr Stacey Bedwell

Personal Tutor

First Marker Name:

First Marker Signature:

Date:

Feedback: General comments on the quality of the work, its successes and where it could be improved

Provisional Uncapped Mark Marks will be capped if this was a late submission or resit assessment and may be moderated up or down by the examination board.

%

Feed Forward: How to apply the feedback to future submissions

Quality and use of Standard English and Academic Conventions

Spelling Errors

Style is Colloquial

Standard is a Cause for Concern

Grammatical Errors

Inappropriate Structure

If the box above has been ticked you should arrange a consultation with a member of staff from the Centre for Academic Success via [email protected]

Punctuation Errors

Inadequate Referencing

Moderator’s Statement

To ensure that assessment processes are rigorous, reliable and fair, this batch of coursework has been subjected to a moderation process. The named independent moderator has checked that marking standards have been applied consistently and fairly.

Moderator Name:

Moderator Signature:

Date:

0 – 39%

Fail

40 – 49%

Third

50 – 59%

2:2

60 – 69%

2:1

70 – 79%

First

80 – 100%

First

Criterion 1

Mark:

Review and synthesise literature from primary sources, leading to a rationale.

Research proposal demonstrates weak or no knowledge of research literature and there is little or no discussion of relevant research literature, no or poor rationale for the proposed study.

Research proposal demonstrates a satisfactory discussion of research literature, but that which is discussed tends to be from secondary sources. The rationale for the proposed project is lacking or unclear.

Research proposal demonstrates a good discussion of research literature but this may be lacking in detail and/or clarity in places. Some of the literature is irrelevant or from unreliable sources. The rationale for the proposed project is good.

Research proposal demonstrates a very good discussion of relevant research literature which is well structured and coherently presented throughout, leading to a clear rationale for the proposed project.

Research proposal demonstrates an excellent and detailed discussion of relevant literature which is well structured and coherently presented throughout, leading to a well-defined rationale for the proposed project.

Research proposal demonstrates an outstanding and detailed discussion of relevant literature which is well structured and coherently presented throughout, leading to a well-defined rationale for the proposed project.

Criterion 2

Mark:

Demonstrate understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports including an awareness of ethical considerations.

Research proposal demonstrates weak or no understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports. Many sections of the proposal are weak or omitted, content is disorganised and lacks clarity. There is a lack of awareness for ethical considerations and the ethical implications.

Research proposal demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports. Sections may be missing some relevant information and may lack clarity. There is satisfactory understanding of ethical implications.

Research proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports but content may lack clarity or explanation in places. There is evidence of some understanding of ethical implications but this requires further consideration. .

Research proposal demonstrates a very good understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports. Content is very good and all sections are presented correctly. There is very good consideration for ethical implications.

Research proposal demonstrates an excellent understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports. The content of the proposal is detailed and takes into consideration relevant ethical and practical implications of the research.

Research proposal demonstrates an outstanding understanding of the content and structure of psychological research reports. The content of the proposal is very detailed and well organised. Ethical and practical implications of the research have been considered and explained well.