| What am I required to do in this assignment? |
| You will produce a proposal for a research study in an area related to microbiology in public health. Note: This assignment relates to this unit only and it is NOT preparation for your SEM3 dissertation/ project unit. This is your opportunity to study an area of microbiology in public health that interests you in greater depth. It will allow you to read and critically analyse the scientific literature about your area of interest, to identify areas where further research can be done and to propose the appropriate methodology that could be used to perform your theoretical study. Your research question should be microbiological but you have broad scope within this to investigate any question relevant to public health. You must predict the likely outcomes of your study and discuss any health and safety or ethical issues that may be raised by the research. A key difference between this assignment and those you are probably more familiar with is that you are required to devise some new experiments capable of generating new data (not entirely new techniques!). Therefore, it is not sufficient to describe tests or experiments you have read about in journal articles or just research and describe lots of general information about a particular bacterial molecular/cellular mechanism, infection, disease epidemic or public health behaviour or strategy. Your task here is to demonstrate that you understand how the research techniques you have learnt about work, the types of data that they generate, their advantages and disadvantages compared to alternatives and how they can be applied to a research question of your choice. |
| Submission Deadline | Marks and Feedback |
| Before 10am on: 01/06/2020 |
20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7) 15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery) 29/06/2020 |
| Unit title & code | Microbiology and Public Health Research Methods |
| Assignment number and title | 001 Research Proposal |
| Assignment type | Electronic submission |
| Weighting of assignment | 100% |
| Size or length of assessment | 4000 words |
| Unit learning outcomes | On completion of this unit you should be able to: 1 Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding: A critical understanding of the application of differing research designs and methods to investigate microbiology in public health. 2 Demonstrate the following skills and abilities: Construct a rigorous and replicable research proposal relevant to microbiology in public health, demonstrating a critical appreciation of relevant research and their value. |
2
| To help you complete your assessment, you will construct the following: 1. A suggestion of research questions for feedback, submitted during unit week 6 2. A proposal outline for peer review during unit week 7-8 (200-300 words) 3. Final submission of the full proposal in unit week 14 |
| What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF) |
| • Construct a focused research question related to microbiology in public health. • Identify, justify and detail an appropriate study design and methodology that addresses the research question. • Critically review relevant background research literature and critically reflect on potential findings, including their implications for microbiology in public health. |
| How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade? |
| Follow the criteria table at the end of this brief, and attend all sessions related to the production and drafting of your proposal. • Construct a rigorous and replicable research proposal relevant to microbiology in public health, demonstrating critical appreciation of relevant research and its value. • Demonstrate a critical understanding of the application of differing research designs and methods to investigate microbiology in public health. Below are the specific guidelines for completing this assessment: Title of Your Project Make this concise and relevant Abstract (<200 words) Summary of your proposal. All the major points relating to your proposed research should be covered here, in a very concise, focused narrative. Introduction and rationale (1200 words) This should provide a solid background to the project grounded in research literature. If your proposed research is about a disease or a protein or an observation that relies on an epidemiological technique, introduce it here. Use the background information to explain how your proposed research differs from that already carried out and justify the need for your proposed work. Here you should critically review the relevant background literature. Remember that readers of research proposals usually know less about the research area than the authors, so make sure the background information and your ideas are introduced in a logical way that is easy to follow. You should include references in this section, perhaps from text books but more likely from journal research articles. See examples of how references are used in introduction sections in the journal articles you read. Be concise and focused- this should not include everything you have read about your subject of interest! Aims & Hypothesis (~100 words) Explain clearly and concisely what you are trying to find out and what you think the result will be. Aims indicate what you are trying to find out or do. Hypotheses are statements that make clear predictions on the answers to your research question. Please remember that a hypothesis is not phrased as a question. Experimental Design (1500 words) What is your research strategy going to be? Outline the methods and techniques that you propose to use and state their purpose in the context of your overall aim. This section should include a flow diagram outlining the samples or information you would collect, how it would be processed in the laboratory or electronically, depending on the nature of the samples, and how the results of each technique would be interpreted to answer your research question. |
3
| Make sure that the data to be generated will answer your question/test your hypothesis i.e. don’t use a protein analysis technique if your aim is to study DNA unless you clearly explain how the results can be interpreted to provide the required information about the DNA of interest. Give an overview of the techniques to be used and the materials required. This should include numbers of human volunteers or swab/cell/sample requirements if appropriate. We require enough experimental detail to know that you understand the principles of the techniques you are proposing to use and what they involve but you are not expected to include the very specific details such as volumes or concentrations unless these are directly relevant to your experimental design. Suggest why the techniques you choose are the most appropriate to perform the study and include a health and safety statement in this section. You will need to use references to support your choice of techniques and/or to refer to details that you don’t have space to include. Ethics (250 words) ALL research has potential ethical implications. Outline those associated with your proposed research and describe how they are related to your hypothesis and aims and/or to your experimental methodology. Are the ethical issues raised justifiable in terms of the research proposed? Are there alternatives that could be used that you have rejected? If so, why? Have you proposed any non-optimal details mainly to avoid using less ethical alternatives? Do you think your proposed research would be permitted in this country or anywhere else and/or would you need specific approval from a professional body or similar? Results (500 words) Explain the format of data expected from the experiments performed and what you would expect to see based on your hypothesis. This could be a prediction of both positive and negative results. This section should not include actual predictions of specific values- you are unlikely to be able to predict to that level of detail. However, you should be able to demonstrate that you understand the format of the results likely to be generated by your proposed methodology e.g. gel images following PCR or western blotting, microscopy images following immunohistochemistry, sequencing data from whole genome array, species data from MALDI-TOF, presentation of epidemiological data, questionnaire data, and how you can interpret and analyse the data in order to test your hypothesis. Don’t forget to discuss output for every technique mentioned in the Experimental Design section and vice versa. Outcomes & Conclusion (250 words) Critically reflect on your potential findings. What will the outcomes of your research be? What questions will have been answered? Who will benefit from it? Is there potential for further work or related studies? References Refer to text books and research journals that you can find in the library or through the LRC electronic resources and use the UoB Harvard system of referencing available here: https://lrweb.beds.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/557568/UoBHarvard17_18.pdf. It is better to and you will get more credit for using journal articles, however if you use an internet source, it must be from an appropriate organisation (e.g. University or perhaps a Society for your chosen topic) and should be authored, not Wikipedia or other similar sites. Please ensure that your references relate to the relevant documents and their authors/publishers etc., NOT just the place where you found them. |
| How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions? |
| Support for this assessment is given through Microbiology in Public Health specific tutorials. There will be an initial briefing tutorial. There will be a further tutorial during which feedback will be given on initial ideas and plans and a later session on writing. The Public Health Research Methods lecture series will provide the detailed support for understanding how research is conducted. Timeline indicating how this assessment will be developed during tutorials and your own time: Immediately – start preparing |
| – Identify a broad topic for study e.g. a disease, a drug, a gene, a microorganism, an emerging public health issue, a methodology, prophylactic, treatment etc. – Identify an ‘unknown’ related to your chosen topic e.g. role of a gene of a particular organism in response to drug, use of a novel compound as an adjuvant for a vaccine, societal attitudes to a particular microbiological issue – Outline your ideas for topics of investigation – Eventually you will devise a specific question and form a hypothesis to address the ‘unknown’ that is specific to your topic e.g. Drug X will cause an increase in expression of protein Y. – You will then think about how you would address your hypothesis experimentally (e.g. choice of technique(s)) |
4
| Thursday 27 February (tutorial): generating research ideas Week beginning 16 March – online feedback via BREO From mid-April up to 01 June 2020: Write Full Research Proposal |
| – Outline your ideas so far using the outline template form A (on BREO) and submit to BREO before 13 March 2020. – Feedback is provided on your ideas as submitted on Form A by 13 March – Receive and record your feedback on Form B, reflect upon this in Form C & choose which ideas to use in the preparation of your written proposal. – Upload Forms B and C to BREO (by 03 April) for further formative feedback if you wish – Use ideas resulting from taught sessions and online feedback to do more research/planning as required – Begin writing using the brief as guidance – Watch a final tutorial for specifics on meeting the brief (Panopto recording, available by 30 April) – You may submit a draft of your work so far by Fri 15 May to receive some guidance and formative feedback on the structure and planned content. The draft does not have to be complete and could be anything from a simple plan up to an almost full draft. You can receive feedback on anything you choose |
| How will my assignment be marked? |
| Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page. You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit. |
| Pass – 40-49% | Pass – 50-59% | Commendation – 60- 69% |
Distinction– 70%+ | |
| Understanding and analysis of scientific principles broadly related to the proposed work (~20%) |
Acceptable level of understanding of relevant scientific principles. Review of relevant literature is rather superficial. An attempt to describe broader context and list aims is made |
Acceptable level of understanding of relevant scientific principles and adequate review of relevant literature, though some omissions or tangents. A reasonable attempt to describe broader context |
Clear knowledge and understanding of the relevant scientific principles and material. Detailed and focused review of previously published literature related to the broader context of the proposed work. Aim and hypothesis are explained |
A comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the relevant scientific principles and material. Detailed and focused review of previously published literature related to the broader context of the proposed work. Aims and hypotheses are explained and justified |
| Critical evaluation and discussion of |
Satisfactory evidence of evaluation of scientific problem. Some attempt |
Satisfactory evidence of evaluation of scientific problem. Some ability to |
Demonstrates ability to evaluate scientific problems and to make logical links |
Demonstrates a clear ability to evaluate scientific problems and to make |
5
| the research problem (~25%) |
is made to link the proposal to the current literature. However, evaluation is superficial in places and the rationale of the proposed work is not well defined |
link the current scientific thought with the proposed work is shown. However, evaluation is superficial in places and the rationale of the proposed work is not well defined |
between the current scientific thought and the rationale of the proposed work. Some points could be better justified or evidenced |
logical links between the current scientific thought and the rationale of the proposed work. |
| Experimental design (25%) |
A satisfactory attempt to explain aim and approach. Proposed experiments are generally relevant to stated aim although there is evidence of errors and/or omissions in understanding of the proposed techniques. |
A reasonable attempt to explain aim and approach. Proposed experiments and flow diagram are generally logical and relevant to stated aim although there is evidence of errors and/or omissions in understanding of the proposed techniques. |
Experimental aim is defined and proposed experiments constitute a logical approach to achieving the aim. Clear description of appropriate methodology complemented by logical flow diagram. Understanding of proposed methodology in terms of inputs, mechanisms and outputs is shown. |
Experimental aim is well defined and proposed experiments constitute a logical approach to achieving the aim. Clear and accurate description of appropriate methodology complemented by logical flow diagram. Clear understanding shown of all proposed methodology in terms of inputs, mechanisms and outputs. |
| Communication and structure (20%) |
Written expression is at times unclear although the overall message can be understood. The structure and flow of the report requires significant improvement |
Written expression is clear and arguments can be followed without undue difficulty. The structure and flow of the report is generally logical, albeit with a few tangents or inefficiencies |
Written expression is clear and concise. Arguments are put forward accurately and rationally and the structure and flow of the report is logical. |
Written expression is clear and concise, within the word count. Arguments are put forward accurately and logically and the structure and flow of the report is of a near professional standard. |
| Use of literature and referencing (10%) |
Appropriate literature is accessed, but more sources could have been used. There is reliance on secondary sources. In-text citations and UoB Harvard format are generally used correctly. |
A reasonable range of literature is accessed, including important primary sources. In-text citations are used appropriately and UoB Harvard format is generally used correctly. |
A range of primary sources is accessed. Correct UoB Harvard formatting of citations and reference list used throughout. |
A wide range of relevant primary sources is accessed. Correct UoB Harvard formatting of citations and reference list used throughout. |
The post produce a proposal for a research study appeared first on My Assignment Online.
Plagiarism Free Assignment Help
Expert Help With This Assignment — On Your Terms
✓ Native UK, USA & Australia writers
✓ Deadline from 3 hours
✓ 100% Plagiarism-Free — Turnitin included
✓ Unlimited free revisions
✓ Free to submit — compare quotes
