NSG2NMR 2022 Term 1 Assessment 1 Part B
Assessment 1 Part B Aim
The aim of Assessment 1 Part B is for you to conduct a literature review based on your research question (Part A) and consider how well the evidence addresses the question and the implications for clinical practice.
NOTE: Students are encouraged to consider feedback from Assessment 1 Part A, and refine their question and database search before undertaking Assessment 1 Part B.
In your essay you will need to address each of the following:
• Review the main concepts/ findings in the literature in relation to your question
• Consider how well the evidence addresses the research question
• Identify and describe the implications of this evidence for nursing/ midwifery practice
The literature review should include a minimum of eight references.
General Instructions for Assessment 1 Part B
The SILOs associated with this assessment task include SILOs 1,2,3,5.
For further clarification of the grading criteria and mark allocation, refer to the Assessment 1 Part B rubric.
Submission: To Turnitin via the LMS site for NSG2NMR. The document you submit to Turnitin should include the reference list.
• Penalties as per the La Trobe University Policy will be incurred after the due date/time.
• Applications for extension must be received 3 WORKING days prior to the due date/time.
• In accordance with University policy, because this assessment is worth more than 20%, it is eligible for remarking. Applications for remarking must be submitted within 10 days after the release of the final Assessment 1 Part B grade.
Originality: The assessment should be a product of individual and original work. You may discuss the assessment with other students and a subject facilitator whilst you are in the process of developing an understanding of how you will interpret the topic, but each student is expected to submit an individual assessment. Refer to the University webpage on academic integrity Academic Integrity Policy
Turnitin: The University uses text matching software, Turnitin, to analyse similarity between published material and student assignments. The software also matches to other student assignments. All students are required to submit their individual assessment to Turnitin, by the due date/time; assessments will not be graded until the Turnitin report is available. You will have an opportunity to submit assessment drafts to Turnitin to check the similarity index for issues with paraphrasing and citation, and make amendments if required, before finalising the assessment by the due date/time.
Your assessment must be submitted to Turnitin via the LMS site for NSG2NMR and under your own access code (otherwise it will be attributed to the person who logged onto the LMS site). The report on your first submission will be available almost immediately, but reports on subsequent submissions can take 24 hours to process.
Document format: The assignment should be submitted as a Microsoft Word document using the template provided. Turnitin will NOT accept Pages documents (i.e., the format created on Macs). Please convert your file format if you need to.
Penalties: Late submissions shall be penalised in accordance with La Trobe University’s policy and procedure on ‘Assessment procedure – Adjustment to assessments’ Adjustments to assessment Policy. All assignments received more than 10 days after the due date/time will not be accepted. A score of ‘0’ will be recorded. The assignment will NOT be marked.
Assignments submitted within 10 WORKING days of the due date/time will have the penalty subtracted after the assignment grade has been determined. Weekend days, public holidays, and University holidays are not counted as days overdue. Penalties for late work that has had no prior approved extension will be calculated as follows:
Submission by due date/time: no penalty
• Within 1 working day (24 hours) after the assignment was due: subtract 5 marks
• Within 2 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 10 marks • Within 3 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 15 marks • Within 4 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 20 marks
• Within 5 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 25 marks • Within 6 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 30 marks • Within 7 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 35 marks • Within 8 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 40 marks
• Within 9 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 45 marks
• Within 10 working days after the assignment was due: subtract 50 marks
After 10 working days after the assignment was due: not accepted. Not graded. Score of ‘0’ given. Penalties do not apply to approved extensions.
Application for Extensions: Extensions need to be applied for within 3 WORKING days of the due date (and time). Weekend days, public holidays, and University holidays will not be counted – you must allow a full 3 working days to process your application. Applications are to be submitted online – no paper submissions will be accepted. Students with a Learning Access Plan (LAP) and Elite Athletes who require an extension still need to complete this request if an extension is required so we can be informed of your submission intention. An extension is not automatically granted.
You will receive a reply from a member of the Subject Coordination team about the outcome of your extension so that you can plan accordingly. If an extension is granted, the late submission policy and same penalties will apply to the revised due date.
Remark procedure: All assignments that receive a score of less than 50% will be remarked. This is indicated in your general comments. Additionally, members of the teaching and coordination team moderate some assignments for each assessor to ensure consistency across the subject. If your assignment has been moderated, this will be indicated in your general comments.
Students can request a remark for assignments worth 20% or more of their grade for the subject. Remarks must be sought with good reason. The University has formal policies and procedures regarding the re-mark of student work at the student’s request. The process to be followed to seek a remark is as follows:
1. First, discuss your queries or concerns about the grading of your assignment with your assessor. Contact the assessor by email to organise a meeting or phone discussion. The review must take place within 10 working days of the publication of the result. The assessor will discuss your performance in the assessment task with reference to the grading criteria and will also check that the result has been calculated correctly but will not re-mark the work. This is an opportunity for you to understand why you have gained or lost marks, not to negotiate a different mark.
2. If you are not satisfied with the response at this meeting then you have a further 10 working days to apply in writing to the Subject Coordinator for a re-mark of the assignment. The application for remark must:
• Include evidence that the assignment has been reviewed by the assessor
• Report the result of the review
• Explain the grounds on which the re-mark is sought.
A student may request a re-mark of an assessable piece of work only on the grounds that the original assessment: i) was biased; or ii) failed to follow the published assessment criteria or grading scheme for the assessment task. The student must provide evidence to support the grounds claimed. Access to the University Procedure is via this link: Assessment procedure – Validation and Moderation
—-
NSG2NMR 2022 Term 1 Exam 1 Part B Exam 1 Part B Aim
The purpose of Assessment 1 Part B is for you to perform a literature review based on your research question (Part A) and examine how well the evidence addresses the question as well as the implications for clinical practice.
NOTE: Before beginning Assessment 1 Part B, students are urged to examine feedback from Assessment 1 Part A and modify their question and database search.
Each of the following must be addressed in your essay:
• Examine the primary concepts/findings in the literature that are relevant to your topic.
• Think about how well the evidence answers the research question.
• Recognize and explain the consequences of this evidence for nursing/midwifery practice.
The review of literature should include
