Written Report on Quantitative Research Methods
The assignment will contribute 60 percent of your total mark. It will be in the form of a report and should be typed or word-processed; it should comprise no less than 4, 000 words.
Once your assignment has been marked, you will receive written feedback from your tutor.
Your attention is drawn to the consequences of breaching the University’s policies and regulations concerning assessment, including issues relating to plagiarism. These may be found on the University website at (please read pages 62 and 63).
https://www.ajman.ac.ae/upload/docs/Student_Handbook.pdf
It is essential to give acknowledgment of any external sources, making it clear whether the reference is being directly quoted or indirectly consulted. Not to do this may constitute plagiarism, which is considered a severe offense against academic integrity – and against which the official sanctions are severe! In essence, the report should be expressed in your own words, not those of other writers. You may, naturally, quote other sources, but when doing so should attribute and reference this appropriately.
Assignment aim
This assignment aims to show your ability/understanding for collecting the relevant data and choosing the relevant statistical models to analyze such data so as to addressing a research question and testing your hypothesis. The assignment looks at your ability to present the output of your results and also giving accurate interpretations.
Assignment task
You have been asked to prepare a short report (with a word limit of 4,000 words) addressing specific research questions (from your choice based on one (or more) essential article(s)). This report focuses on three major sections:
Section 1: Research method (20%)
You are going to explain: a) how you have selected your sample and how you have collected your data; b) how you have measured your variables; and c) what is your empirical model(s) which will be used to analyze your data in order to answer your research question(s).
Section 2: Data analysis (50%)
You should present your results using any/or all forms of presentations, including graphs, figures, descriptive statistics, correlation analysis/ statistical tests (parametric and/or non- parametric analyses).
Section 3: Discussion (10%)
You should give explanations of the meaning of your results and whether or not these results support your research question(s) and hypothesis.
The remaining (style and presentation of the report) 10% will be for the theoretical framework for your report (to highlight the research question(s) and hypotheses).
Oral Presentation 10% will be for your oral presentation
Criteria
A
90% plus B +
85-89% B
80-84% C-C+
70-79% F
69% or below Marks
Methodology
A clear and deep knowledge of methodology used and of underpinning theories
Understanding of alternative approaches
Fully justified choice of research methods
Clear indication of strengths and limitations of approach Well-justified methodology and useful considerations of underpinning theories
Awareness of alternative approaches
Choice of research methods well justified
Indication of strengths and limitations of approach Methodology adequately justified and chosen methods satisfactorily explained
Some awareness of wider research methodologies
Choice of research methods largely suitable and justified
Strengths and limitations of methodology considered Methodology mot adequately justified and/or not clear what kind of study was undertaken
Choice of methods inappropriate or poorly executed
Underpinning theories not considered at a satisfactory level
Strengths and limitations inadequately considered Not clear what kind of study was undertaken.
Choice of methods inappropriate and poorly executed
No consideration of underpinning theories
12 marks
Analysis
Analysis carried out accurately and with high degree of competence in line with methodological and theoretical premises
Selection, interpretation, comparison, evaluation, and integration of material from empirical or library sources are extremely effective
Significant insight achieved
Judgments strongly based on critical appraisal
Good analysis of data / concepts or theoretical ideas in line with methodological and theoretical premises
Selection, interpretation, comparison, evaluation and integration of material from empirical or library sources are effective, perhaps with some omissions
Useful insight achieved
Judgements are based on critical appraisal Satisfactory analysis of data, concepts or theoretical ideas perhaps with some deviation from theoretical premises
Satisfactory selection, interpretation, comparison, evaluation and integration of material from empirical or library sources, with limitations
Some insights achieved
Judgements show some but limited critical appraisal
Analysis of data, concepts or theoretical ideas is uncertain and/or overly descriptive or anecdotal and/or incorrect
Inadequate selection, interpretation, comparison, evaluation and integration of material from empirical or library sources
Little or no insights achieved
Judgements show lack of critical appraisal
Little or no analysis of data, concepts or theoretical ideas; descriptive, simplistic and anecdotal and/or incorrect
Negligible ability to select, interpret, compare, evaluate and/or integrate material from empirical or library sources
30 marks
Discussion and conclusions Discussion highly relevant to research question and literature
Appropriate discussion of limitations
Logically developed and pertinent conclusions
Discussion relevant to research question and literature
Some discussion of limitations
Conclusion summarises issues and considers implications Discussion of relevance but not comprehensive
Conclusion provides summary
Little or no discussion of relevance
Conclusions may lack any insight due to inadequate analysis No adequate evidence of: insight achieved; critical appraisal; and/or discussion of relevance
No conclusions made 6 marks
Style and Presentation
Introduction is tightly focused with a clear rationale
High degree of internal consistency overall and within each section
Well-chosen subheadings
Highly readable style; ideas communicated clearly
Careful editing and proof-reading; few errors
Length within stipulations
Referencing accurate, appropriate, and conforms exactly to conventions
Presentation meets required expectations fully
Introduction is focused and provides useful guidance to rationale
Good internal coherence overall and within each section
Subheadings summarise content effectively
Readable; ideas generally communicated clearly
Well edited with few errors
Length consistent with expectations
Referencing is accurate, appropriate and conforms to conventions
Presentation meets required expectations fully Introduction describes the central concerns
Overall structure and organisation is satisfactory
Internal coherence of the whole, and each section, is satisfactory.
Subheadings broadly effective
Ideas are generally communicated clearly but language used may present some comprehension difficulties
Length is acceptable
Referencing generally conforms to expectations with occasional inaccuracies
Presentation meets most expectations Introduction may not reflect focus of study
Structure and organisation may not be satisfactory leading to weakness in internal coherence overall and within sections
Subheadings not effective
Ideas may not be presented clearly and language may present comprehension difficulties
Length may not be consistent with expectations
Referencing may contain inaccuracies in citation and attribution
Presentation may fail to meet expectations Ineffective introduction
Poor structure so that arguments that may be present fail to develop logically
Incoherence within and between sections evident throughout
Language used presents significant comprehension difficulties
There may be significant typological errors
The length may be unacceptable
Referencing may contain substantial inaccuracies in citation and attribution
Presentation may fail to meet expectations
6 marks
Total Marks 54marks
Oral presentation
Oral skills
Elocution Candidate uses a clear voice, rhythm and tone, so that all audience members can hear presentation
Candidate’s voice is clear, and most of the audience members can easily hear the presentation.
The tone used changes Candidate’s voice is clear, and most of the audience members can easily hear the presentation.
The tone used changes but not frequently Candidate’s voice is low- medium, but part of the audience still has some difficulty hearing presentation. Tonality barely changes Candidate mumbles, very low voice and do not use any tonal differences
2
Content skills
Subject Knowledge
Candidate demonstrates full knowledge and can answer and elaborate on most/all questions asked
Candidate is at ease with information and answers questions satisfactorily, with reasonable elaboration Candidate is at ease with information and answers questions satisfactorily, with limited elaboration Candidate is comfortable with information but is only able to answer simple questions
Candidate does not appear to have a grasp of information; cannot answer questions about subject
4
Total Marks 6 Marks
Recommend resources:
Students are encouraged to use digital resources from Ajman University:
https://www.ajman.ac.ae/en/research/library/databases-and-e-journals
Please give particular attention to the three valuable resources:
1) Emerald
2) EBSCO
3) Sciencedirect
Students can use Datastream (Eikon), with remote access
Students can use Nvivo, with remote access
Students can use the Typeset with their AU logon details:
Registra2on Link: au.typeset.io
Please register with your “@ajman.ac.ae” email to get started.
About Typeset:
Typeset is a pla[orm to help you write, format, and submit beaer research papers to journals. It also helps you create your thesis, assignments, and reports with accuracy and speed.
With Typeset you can:
Auto-format with 100% compliance to any journal or thesis guidelines in seconds. Cite and order your reference to any cita2on style.
Generate a plagiarism report via popular services such as Turni2n and Unicheck. Perform spelling and grammar check.
Access services such as Journal Submission and English Edi2ng to improve content quality. Import exis2ng MS Word files within seconds to any format.
Export to MS-Word, LaTeX, or PDF.
Re-format papers to another journal with a single click of a buaon.
Choose from over 45,000+ formats (including verified Scopus and WoS indexed journals from Elsevier, Springer, IEEE, etc.)
How to use Typeset:
Here is a set of short Tutorials to get started
a. How to get started with your University Account? – Video b. How to use Typeset Editor? – Video
c. How to generate Output for your template? – Video
Documenta2on and FAQs can be accessed at help.typeset.io