Assessment Task Name Critical Appraisal Specific Assessment Guidelines for Students Critical Appraisal of VARK Learning Styles model (Fleming & Mills, 1992) – you will be asked to critically evaluate the VARK learning styles model, which categorises
Assessment Brief FDY3046 Academic Skills Semester Due 25 Jan by 17:00
Points 100
Submitting an external tool
Assessment 2 - Critical Appraisal - 1500 words
Upload Submission
Assessment Brief FDY3046 Academic Skills Semester 1 September 2025.docx
Module Handbook FDY3046 Academic Skills Semester 1 September 2025.docx
Assessment Brief FDY3046 Academic Skills Semester 1 September 2025.docx
Module Name: Academic Skills
Module Number: FDY3046
Module Level: Level 3
Module Leader: Jodie Teale
Module Tutor: Jodie Teale / Dr Jess Davis / Dr David Sims
Assignment Brief: January 2025
Year: 2025/2026 Semester 1
Rationale:
This module is designed to help develop the student as a learner by imparting critical skills relevant to students undertaking science-based pathways, providing a foundation for the remainder of their studies. The module will also require students to consider their learning identity and how they can adapt and improve it to enhance the likelihood of success on their degree.
This module aims to provide students with an opportunity to understand the expectations and core skills required of a learner and to reflect on the core competencies and attributes needed to be successful in their degree. The module aims to equip students with the critical skills needed in academia to ensure rigour and credibility in research. The module also aims to help students develop reflection techniques which they will need for continuing educational success and presentation skills which will help them to develop confidence in articulating their ideas and speaking in public.
Core Learning Outcomes:
Identify the core learning competencies and attributes required to be successful in academia. Consider their learning style and reflect on how this has impacted their learning experiences in the past. Begin to develop a critical eye towards research. Develop an understanding of academic writing. Research collection and synthesis. Communicate efficiently using the means of an oral presentation. Assessment 2: Critical Appraisal
Assessment Task Name Critical Appraisal Specific Assessment Guidelines for Students Critical Appraisal of VARK Learning Styles model (Fleming & Mills, 1992) – you will be asked to critically evaluate the VARK learning styles model, which categorises learners as Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, or Kinaesthetic. You should try to make sure you: Explore VARK: Start by understanding how the VARK model defines learning preferences and the claims it makes. Critically Evaluate: Assess the validity, reliability, trustworthiness, relevance, and value of the VARK theory. Is it accurate, consistent, and useful in today's educational context? Develop Your Perspective: Develop your own informed/evidence-based opinion on the VARK model by weighing evidence and questioning assumptions. Outcome: By the end, you'll understand the strengths and weaknesses of VARK and how to critically assess educational theories. This Assessment is due or will take place on: You will need have submitted via the Turnitin link on Canvas by Deadline: Week 15 on your respective day of teaching before 5pm. Sport and exercise science (Saturday 12pm-3pm) Saturday 24th of January 2026 Sport and exercise Nutrition (Sunday 10am-1pm) Saturday 25th of January 2026 Date Grade and Feedback will be available: 3 weeks post-assessment submission. N.B. Assessment marks are not final until after the University Examination Board Resubmissions 2nd Attempt (for students who did not pass their first attempt) 24th of April 2026 Resubmissions 3rd Attempt (Final Opportunity) (for students who did not pass their 2nd attempt) 3rd of July 2026 Date Feedback and Grade will be available (2nd and 3rd Attempts): Two Weeks Post Due Date NB. Assessment grades are not final until the University Examination Board takes place Assessment Criteria - Critical Appraisal
School of Health and Sport Science Foundation Year in Sport and Exercise Science Semester 1 (150 Words Total)
FDY3046 Academic Skills (Appraisal)
Assessment Criteria Outstanding (70%+) Excellent (70%+) Very Good (60-69%) Good (50-59%) Average (60%) Satisfactory (50%) Below Average (40-49%) Fail (40%) Student Number: Academic Argument (alignment) Introduction is concise, introduces and previews the argument Introduction is concise, introduces and previews the argument. Introduction is concise, introduces and previews the argument. Argument is well-developed and well-defined. Argument is not well-developed and not well-defined. Argument is satisfactory but not well-developed. Argument is missing. Conclusion is missing. Overall mark: Outstanding Highly developed, clear, concise consideration of the issue and debates through showing an advanced understanding and thorough issues and debates. Argument is advanced, showing knowledge through consideration of the issue and debates. Conclusion is an advanced summary of the issue and considers overall main argument. Conclusion is a summary with some main arguments considered. Argument lacks logical analysis and thorough showing of debates satisfactory Overall understanding Clear engagement and well-advanced consideration of the issues and debates satisfactory and linear advance and conclusion of debate. Argument lacks logical main argument. Conclusion is rudimentary with basic and thorough showing of relevant sources and poor standard. Style (content) Academic Research Reading Exceptional writing good writing style. Style is highly clear, reader-oriented well. Outstanding aware stance which has excellent range of relevant sources of the evidence and explores and relevant stories. Exceptional writing good writing style slightly less developed. Developed awareness and sources. Frequent use of relevant stories which developed with deep research and literature. Excellent writing good writing style with occasional and unclear punctuation errors. Clear engagement and good relevant research sources relevant story. Basic writing good writing good style but many style errors of not unstructured or well-tailored. Satisfactory engagement and weak relevant sources beyond those provided. Unclear, unstructured or wrong style. Insufficient evidence of insufficient relevant sources beyond those provided that research. Numerous spelling, grammar or poor formatting errors. Very poor use of irrelevant and inappropriate and research and literature. Writing style is inappropriate. Very unclear or no evidence. No evidence of sufficient structure. No evidence
