Week 8 – Final Assessment 2: Portfolio Assessment - Guidelines Module title: Psychology Research Skills Module code: 7505 PSYSCI Assessment Point: Summative assessment 2 Assessment task: Portfolio (3 components) ● A rese

Academic Experts

27 Oct 2026 • 13 min read

Week 8 – Final Assessment 2: Portfolio

Assessment - Guidelines Module title: Psychology Research Skills Module code: 7505 PSYSCI

Assessment Point: Summative assessment 2 Assessment task: Portfolio (3 components)

● A research proposal (word count limit: 3000 words ±10%)

● A short essay (word count limit: 1500 words ±10%)

● A critical article review (word count limit: 1000 words ±10%) Submission deadline: Please consult the VLE.

Submission procedure: Please submit via the submission link on the VLE.

Extenuating circumstances

If you are experiencing unforeseen personal circumstances that are affecting your ability to submit within the stipulated deadlines, you are required to communicate these issues to the Unicaf Extenuating Circumstances team in the first instance, via extenuating.circumstances@unicaf.org, for further information on how to make a personal circumstances application for consideration.

Personal circumstances requests may usually only be made within 5 working days of the original deadline unless valid justification, along with appropriate evidence, exists to show that you could not have reasonably communicated the issues any earlier. It is important to keep in mind that if the claim is not upheld and you have not submitted by the deadline, the module shall be failed as a result of no submission of the summative assessment.

Submission Deadline

Please submit your module summative assessment(s) by 11:59 pm (23:59 hours) VLE (UTC) time on the due date at the latest. Any summative assessment submitted up to 5 days late will be accepted, but the mark will be capped at 50%. Any work submitted more than 5 days late after the submission deadline will be recorded as 0%.

Academic misconduct including plagiarism

Written coursework will be submitted on VLE, through an on-line plagiarism- detection service called Turnitin. The web link for further information can be found at https ://o wl .purdue .edu /o wl /av o iding _plagiarism /index .html .

Turnitin matches the text of what you submit with the information held in its databases (including journal articles and previous submissions by other students), and the web. You will have the opportunity to use Turnitin to improve your work. To do this, submit your work well in advance of the deadline, and Turnitin will give you a report of any matches it has found with other sources. You can use this information to re-write those sections in your own words. Leave yourself plenty of time to do this before the final deadline. Be aware that Turnitin is not part of LJMU but a separate company that provides this service to many universities, and if it is busy you may have a short delay before receiving the originality report.

Turnitin will also give you a percentage similarity score. Tutors are often asked ‘what Turnitin percentage is OK’? This is an impossible question to answer, because the percentage depends on too many factors. Depending on how the assignment is set up and how you have structured your file, a high percentage could be ‘OK’, because it is only picking up on legitimate similarities with other sources, such as the marksheet, the reference list, or direct quotations. Conversely, a very low percentage might be ‘not OK’ because it is picking up on a small section that has been cut and pasted from the Abstract of a journal article. This is plagiarism, and it is unacceptable even when it only makes up a small percentage of the total. So, tutors will never just look at the raw percentage when they are marking your work, they will look at WHAT is similar in the full originality report.

By submitting your work, you acknowledge that you have read and agree with the above statements.

General Guidance

Your assignment should be word processed (handwritten assignments are not accepted), using Times new roman size 12 font, double spaced, with numbered pages and your student number printed as a footer on every page. The word limits stated for this assignment excludes the reference list at the end of the assignment but includes all text in the main body of the assignment (including direct quotations, in-text citations, tables). Tables and figures should not be included within your text but separately as an Appendix. Please be aware that exceeding the word count limit will affect the academic judgement of the piece of work and may result in the award of a lower mark. Appendices are not considered a supplement, and thus, will not be assessed as part of the content of the assignment. As such, they will not contribute to the grade awarded; however, it may be appropriate to use an Appendices section for any material which is a useful reference for the reader. Please note that appendices are not included in the word count. The majority of references should come from

primary sources (e.g., journal articles, conference papers, reports, etc.) although you can also utilise area specific textbooks. You must ensure that you use the APA style of referencing which is the APA 7th Edition, please see here:

https ://o wl .purdue .edu /o wl /research _and _citati o n /apa _style /apa _style _ intr o ducti o n .html . Please indicate the word count length at the end of your assignment.

NO STUDENT WILL BE ALLOWED TO COLLECT ANY PRIMARY DATA

Marking and assessment

The second summative assessment requires the writing of a research proposal. The Research Proposal assignment submission will be graded out of 100%. Please note that the Portfolio assessment will contribute to 70% of your overall module grade.

Learning outcomes assessed in component 1

● Write a research proposal in a concise and academic manner

Component 1 Guidelines:

Write a 3000-words Research Proposal coming from the field of your choice; educational psychology, organizational psychology, health, forensic or positive psychology

Your research proposal must include the following parts in terms of content and structure:

● Title

● Abstract

● Research Context - a brief overview of your general area of study, summarising current knowledge and recent debates on the topic, as well as research gaps

● Research questions (clearly stated) - the central aims and questions that will guide your research (prioritise one or two main questions, from which secondary questions may follow)

● Research Methods - how you intend to answer your research questions, your main research techniques (interviews, case studies, modelling, etc) and data collection procedures

● Significance of Research - an explanation of why your research is important and what makes it original

● Bibliography - a bibliography identifying the most relevant and recent works for your subject area (not included in word count)

Retrieved from: https ://www .ljmu .ac .uk /study /p o stgraduate -students /h o w -t o- apply /applying -f o r -a -phd

For further and more detailed guidance on the structure of the assignment you can refer to the marking scheme below.

Research Proposal (/60)

Title of Section	Criteria		Marks Awarded
Cover Page	● Assignment topic and personal details
Title / Abstract/ Introduction	● A concise comprehensive summary of the research proposal - Abstract ● A brief overview of the topic under study, identifying research gaps, establishing importance of the study		/9
Research Questions	● Clearly stated in an appropriate manner so as to be assessed, either qualitatively or quantitatively ● Corresponding to the objective of the study and to
	the abstract ● Prioritisation of the main questions, from which secondary questions may follow		/12
Methodology	● Thorough descriptions of sample, measures and research analyses – analytical strategy (research ● techniques and procedures)		/18
Potential significance and originality of the study	● Establishment of significance ● Use of arguments based on literature review and / or on contextual factors (e.g. finding solutions/ answers to an emerging global crisis)		/12
Bibliography	● Identification of the most relevant and recent works for the specific subject area		/6
Presentation & Referencing	● ●	Correct use of grammar, punctuation and spelling Appropriate writing style (use of “third” person)
	●	References coming from academic journals and
	●	primary sources References reported accurately in essay text and in attached “References” section	/3

Component 2: Essay (/20)

Write a short essay on the following topic:

We assessed Focus Groups in week 3 as a qualitative method for data collection.

Please write a short 1500-words (± 10%) essay to:

● Explain how Focus Groups work and when it is appropriate to use them

● Appreciate their advantages, limitations and ethical concerns

References and Further Information

The reading material in this module should not be your only source of information. You are expected to read around the topics using other resources and critically evaluate / review and implement them accordingly in your essays.

Essays should be a reflection of a student’s independent work. Remember that essays that include parts with a striking resemblance to published material, material on the internet (that are not properly referenced), or another student’s work are considered as having been plagiarised.

Please refer to the relevant guidelines of how to write a critical essay, uploaded in week’s 8 reading material, before you proceed with writing up the essay.

Essay ((/20)

Title of Section	Criteria		Marks Awarded
Cover Page	● Assignment topic and personal details
Title /Introduction	● Build an introductory paragraph including a brief overview of the topic under study ● Restate the theme in your own words ● Define key words/concepts/theories		/3
Main Body (Structured in distinct paragraphs)	● ● ● ●	Present thoroughly /describe the method For each argument/key point write examples and / or ideas that add credibility to your words Thoroughly discuss advantages and disadvantages of the method Refer to ethical considerations / reflect on the issue	/8
Conclusion	●	Restate the theme under study and refer back to
		the main points, to conclude on the effectiveness of the method described in the essay.	/5
Bibliography	●	Identification of the most relevant and recent works for the specific subject area	/2
Presentation & Referencing	● ●	Correct use of grammar, punctuation and spelling Appropriate writing style (use of “third” person)
	●	References coming from academic journals and
	●	primary sources References reported accurately in essay text and in attached “References” section	/2

Component 3: A critical review of a journal article (/20)

For this assignment you will have to read:

“Carlin, A. P. & Kim, Y. H. (2019). Teaching qualitative research: Versions of grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review,18(1), which can be retrieved from this week’s reading material, and write a 1000 (±15%) words critical review of it.

In your review you may want to address the following:

● What are the main considerations expressed by the authors?

● How do you reflect on them? How do you position yourself in this discussion concerning the co-

● current versions of Grounded theory research?

You can find the article on week’s 8 reading material

Please refer to the relevant guidelines of how to write a critical review of an article, uploaded in week’s 8 Reading material, before you proceed with writing up the review

Critical Review of a Journal Article (/20)

Title of Section	Criteria	Marks Awarded
Cover Page	● Assignment topic and personal details
Title /Introduction	● Build an introductory paragraph including a brief overview of the purposes of your review ● Define related key words/concepts as referred by the author(s) of the article ● Clearly state the basic aim of the authors	/3
Main Body (Structured in distinct paragraphs)	● Present thoroughly the positions discussed by the authors / the arguments they use / the examples they use ● Reflect on their reasoning / on the way they build their argumentation ● Clearly state the authors’ conclusion ● Position yourself in this discussion concerning the co-current versions of Grounded theory research	/8
Conclusion	● Restate the theme of your essay and refer back to
	the main points, to conclude on your review of the article	/5
Bibliography	● The sources used to support your positions	/2
Presentation & Referencing	● Correct use of grammar, punctuation and spelling ● Appropriate writing style (use of “third” person) ● References coming from academic journals and
	primary sources ● References reported accurately in essay text and in attached “References” section	/2

LJMU Level 7 Grading Criteria

Grade descriptors for Level 7 written work – 2016-17 Please note that these level 7 descriptors apply to programmes validated for a 2016 – 17 start when level 7 modules will have a pass mark of 50% (including those that form part of UG Masters programmes).
Mark Range	Characteristic	Criteria
90-100	Exceptional Pass	Exemplary attainment of all learning outcomes Demonstrates an outstanding synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Wide-ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Offers an exhaustive exploration of the literature and evidence-base The material covered is accurate and relevant The argument is highly sophisticated The standard of writing is refined No errors in the use of the specified referencing system Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.
80-89	Outstanding Pass	Excellent attainment of all learning outcomes, with some met to an exemplary standard Demonstrates a comprehensive synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Wide-ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Extends far beyond expected levels of engagement with the literature and evidence-base The material covered is accurate and relevant The argument is generally very astute The standard of writing is refined No errors in the use of the specified referencing system Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.
70-79	Excellent pass	Excellent attainment of all learning outcomes Demonstrates a thorough synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Strong emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Thorough use the literature and evidence-base The material covered is accurate and relevant The argument is persuasive and there are very perceptive elements The standard of writing is refined No errors in the use of the specified referencing system Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.

60-69	Good Pass	Good attainment of all learning outcomes Demonstrates detailed synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Good emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Good consideration of the literature and evidence-base that develops from recommended readings The material covered is accurate and relevant The argument is persuasive The standard of writing is refined No errors in the use of the specified referencing system Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.
50-59	Pass	Adequate attainment of all learning outcomes Demonstrates a limited, but sufficient, synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Some emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Sufficient consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but little consideration beyond recommended readings The material covered is mostly accurate and relevant The argument is straightforward and relatively clear The standard of writing is well clear and readable, with some sophisticated phrasing No errors in the use of the specified referencing system Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.
40-49	Needs some improvement	Meets most, but not all learning outcomes Demonstrates limited synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Less than expected emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Basic consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but restricted to recommended readings Some inaccuracies or irrelevant materials that suggest confusion and misunderstanding The argument is relatively clear, although some elements are difficult to understand The standard of writing is well clear and readable, but overly simplisticMinor errors in the use of the specified referencing system, but meets key principles Well-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style.
30-39	Needs major improvement	Approximately half the learning outcomes are met Demonstrates very little synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area Little emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline Minor consideration of the literature and evidence-base, with inadequate use of recommended reading and no exploration outside that

Some materials is accurate, but the amount of inaccurate or irrelevant materials indicates insufficient understanding of key concepts The argument is poorly defined and defended

The standard of writing is mostly clear and readable

Some errors in the use of the specified referencing system, but meets key principles

Generally well presented and organised, but does not always conform to conventions of academic presentation.

20-29

Needs

significant revision

Most learning outcomes are not met

Demonstrates no synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area

Little or no emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline

Superficial consideration of the literature and evidence- base There are major inaccuracies or significant amounts of irrelevant material

The argument is very weak

The standard of writing is reasonable and there are very few areas of confusion and/or errors in spelling/grammar Attempts to use the specified referencing system.

Meets key principles, but there are systematic errors

Good presentation that may include some organisational errors and/or tendency not to conform to conventions of academic presentation.

0-19

Needs

substantial work

Does not meet any learning outcomes

Demonstrates misunderstanding of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area

No emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the discipline

No engagement with the literature and evidence-base

The material covered is inaccurate or irrelevant The argument is incoherent

The standard of writing is acceptable.

The structure is reasonable, but there are some areas of confusion and/or some errors in spelling/grammar Attempts to use the specified referencing system, but there are significant errors Acceptable presentation that may include some organisational errors and a tendency not to conform to conventions of academic presentation.