You are required to write a Report detailing the Theoretical Framework of your year-long research project. This should contain: the research title an introduction that sets the context of the research and includes a justification - Custom Essay Writing Services for Students Worldwide

Title: Theoretical Framework of a Research Project

Style: Report

Rationale: The Individual Honours Project is the academic apex of your undergraduate degree. It is the first project you are asked to complete fully autonomously. It hones your research skills and allows you to demonstrate that you can think originally, work independently, and respond to unknowns creatively.

Description:

You are required to write a Report detailing the Theoretical Framework of your year-long research project. This should contain:

the research title

an introduction that sets the context of the research and includes a justification of its importance

a clear aim, that stems from the justification, and concise objectives that will allow you to achieve the project aim

a comprehensive literature review, with a synthesis of its results

the research methodology, including a justification for the selected approach

completed Ethics form

completed Risk Assessment, including Information Security aspects

The report should be between 3,000 and 3,500 words.

This word count excludes lists of tables and captions, references, and appendices.

Additional information:

For advice on writing style, referencing and academic skills, please make use of the Centre for Academic Success: Centre for Academic Success – student support | Birmingham City University (bcu.ac.uk)

Transferable skills:

1. Work individually and accept responsibility for the modules study program through planning, setting objectives and responding to briefs.

2. Develop, enhance and evaluate research and analytical skills through the delivery of an individual research project.

3. Access, retrieve and evaluate secondary information and/ or primary information from an extensive range of appropriate academic sources.

4. Devise and sustain arguments using relevant ideas and information, demonstrating the critical evaluation of arguments, assumptions and data to lead to appropriate conclusions.

Marking Criteria:

Learning Outcomes

Introduction

20%

Aim and Objectives

20%

Literature Review

25%

Methodology

25%

Professionalism

10%

Assessment

Criteria

Weighting:

Grading

Criteria

0 29%

Inadequate title with little or no clarification of the project.

Wholly inadequate introduction providing little or no context and rationale for the research.

No or unclear aim. No or unclear and/or irrelevant objectives.

No or inadequate literature review, with few sources and little analysis.

No or inadequate methodology, with unclear or not relevant actions, and no schedule or budget & equipment considerations. No Ethics form or Risk Assessment.

Wholly inadequate presentation, with poor structure, making the work very difficult to follow. Lack of images and graphs to support the points made in the text. Inadequate use of English,and lack or misuse of professional terminology. Inadequate or no referencing.

30 39%

Inadequate title with little clarification of the project.

Inadequate introduction providing little context and poor rationale.

Unclear or inadequate aim. Unclear or irrelevant objectives, with no or few links to the methodology and the aim.

Inadequate literature review, with limited sources not reviewed appropriately.

Inadequate methodology, with unclear actions, with little connection to the objectives and unclear schedule with few budget & equipment considerations.

No, or incomplete, Ethics form and Risk Assessment.

Inadequate presentation, with poor structure, making the work difficult to follow. Few or no images and graphs to support the points made in the text. Inadequate use of English, and application of professional terminology. Inadequate referencing, not following established practice.

40 49%

Adequate title though somewhat unclear.

Adequate introduction with some context and partial rationale.

Adequate, though somewhat unclear, aim. Adequate objectives, though not very clear, with few links to the aim and the methodology.

Adequate literature review, with some sources, partially reviewed.

Adequate methodology, though not fully explained and with limited connection to the objectives. Adequate schedule of activities with limited budget & equipment considerations.

Adequate Ethics form and Risk Assessment.

Adequate presentation, with generally acceptable structure, though the work might be difficult to follow fully. Few images and graphs to support the points made in the text. Adequate use of English and application of professional terminology, but with frequent inaccuracies. Adequate referencing, but with some errors.

50 59%

Satisfactory title, relevant to the project.

Satisfactory introduction with context to the research and generally reasonable rationale.

Satisfactory aim, though too broad and/or narrow. Satisfactory objectives, though somewhat unclear, with some links to the aim and the methodology.

Satisfactory literature review, with reasonable range of sources, with some analysis.

Satisfactory methodology, with reasonable explanation and generally supporting the objectives. Satisfactory schedule of activities with some budget & equipment considerations.

Completed Ethics form and satisfactory Risk Assessment.

Satisfactory presentation and structure. Some images and graphs to support the points made in the text. Satisfactory use of English and professional terminology, but with some inaccuracies. Satisfactory referencing, but with the occasional error.

60 69%

Highly satisfactory title, summarising the project appropriately.

Highly satisfactory introduction with appropriate context to the research and reasonable rationale.

Highly satisfactory aim, covering the topic. Highly satisfactory objectives, serving the aim and suggesting the methodological approach.

Highly satisfactory literature review, with broad range of sources, appropriately reviewed with some synthesis.

Highly satisfactory methodology, with clear explanation, supporting the objectives. Highly satisfactory schedule of activities with budget & equipment considerations taken into account. Completed Ethics form and highly satisfactory Risk Assessment.

Highly satisfactory presentation and structure, making the work easy to follow. Supported by images and graphs to highlight the points made in the text. Highly satisfactory use of English and professional terminology. Highly satisfactory referencing.

70 79%

Excellent title, explaining the project with precision.

Excellent introduction with comprehensive yet concise context to the research and clear, strong rationale.

Excellent aim, covering the topic. Excellent objectives, serving the aim appropriately and linking to the methodological approach.

Excellent literature review, with broad range of appropriate sources, comprehensively reviewed with good synthesis, leading to the methodology.

Excellent methodology, with comprehensive yet concise explanation, supporting the objectives fully. Excellent schedule of activities with budget & equipment considerations taken into account fully.

Completed Ethics form and excellent Risk Assessment.

Excellent presentation of the work, with clear and appropriate structure, enhancing the text. Well supported by images and graphs, further explaining the points made in the text. Excellent use of English and professional terminology. Excellent referencing to the Harvard system.

80 89%

A+

Excellent title, in line with professional research standards.

Excellent introduction providing comprehensive and concise context to the research, linking the project to multi-disciplinary aspects. Clear and concise rationale, providing a strong argument for the importance of the research.

Excellent aim, responding fully to the rationale, covering the topic comprehensively but concisely. Excellent objectives, serving the aim fully and suggesting a clear methodological approach.

Excellent literature review, with a very wide range of relevant sources, comprehensively reviewed with excellent synthesis, leading to the methodology, and drawing original insights.

Excellent methodology, with comprehensive yet concise explanation, supporting the objectives fully, while following international best practice and demonstrating original insights. Excellent schedule of activities with budget & equipment considerations taken into account fully and dealt with creatively. Completed Ethics form and excellent Risk Assessment, identifying unusual or particularly challenging Risks.

Exemplary presentation of the work, with professional structure, enhancing the text, and showcasing originality and creativity. Excellently supported by a range of different visual material, enhancing the text. Excellent use of English and professional terminology throughout. Excellent referencing to the Harvard system.

90-100%

Excellent title, in line with professional research standards.

Excellent introduction providing comprehensive and concise context to the research, linking the project to multi-disciplinary aspects, and demonstrating an original and innovative approach. Clear and concise rationale, providing a state-of the art argument for the importance of the research, in line with professional research standards.

Excellent, innovative aim, responding fully to the rationale, covering the topic comprehensively but concisely, in line with professional research standards. Excellent objectives, serving the aim fully and suggesting a clear methodological approach, while engaging with the state-of-the-art in research.

Outstanding literature review, covering all relevant state-of-the-art resources, comprehensively reviewed with excellent, innovative synthesis, leading directly to the methodology, and enabling for original insights, with potential for substantial impact.

Outstanding methodology, comprehensive, concise, fully justified, going above the state-of-the-art practice, demonstrating original and innovative thinking. All supporting documentation completed to a professional standard.

Exemplary presentation of the work, with professional structure, enhancing the text, and showcasing originality, creativity, and a competence in the use of various media, enhancing the text.

Outstanding use of English, with professional terminology throughout, but also creativity and flair. Excellent referencing to the Harvard system.