Assignment Feedback: A Case Study, an Ethics Review & a Questionnaire Report

The end of last semester was packed with assignments, especially with two being due in only a couple days apart.  I am pleased with how they all turned out, especially the case study as I had never previously done one before and it made a change from doing a report.  All three pieces of feedback will help in my upcoming poster & report assignments and will aid in the development of my analytical and writing skills.

Case Study:

I chose the topic of ‘Learning in the Classroom’ for my case study evaluation and used Piagetian theory to develop a lesson plan whilst explaining the impact and effectiveness of the theory in real-life educational settings.  I received 78/100 which equates to a high first; it is extremely rewarding to receive this grade as I put a lot of effort into this assignment.

A strength of my work was how I demonstrated “detailed/excellent knowledge and understanding” throughout the case study.  This is further shown by my use of “a wide and appropriate range of sources” to support my points.  Furthermore, I conducted “independent research that extended well beyond the lecture contents”.

There was a small number of typos/grammatical slips that I made in the case study but “these did not hinder understanding”.  Next time I will let someone else proof reads my work to spot any mistakes that I have missed and will ensure that I write ‘&’ as ‘and’.

Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Case Study Evaluation: Learning in Classroom Feedback

Ethics Review:

The title I chose to write about was “Discuss whether animal research typically performed by psychologists is unethical”.  This was the most interesting topic to me because, as a Psychology student, I have to conduct psychological experiments throughout my degree and ethics will always be something I have to consider when doing so.  I received 72/100 which is a first.

My work showed “pleasing levels of analysis and evaluation” with an “analytical strand that permeates the discussion, which permits a balanced presentation of differing viewpoints”.  I also demonstrated engagement within the topic, as well as a very good general understanding of the issues whilst including an “excellent range of independently researched sources in the essay” which were put to “effective use”.

To improve, I could signpost more to further structure my essay and include a couple more citations in-text to illustrate my point more.

Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Ethics Review on Animal Research Feedback

Questionnaire Report:

The title of my report was “A comparison of The Psychological Sense of School Membership in University Students between Males and Females” based upon a questionnaire experiment.  I received a high 2:1 and got 68/100.

A strength of my assignment is how I illustrated a “good understanding of the topic area and results, with some evidence of critical thinking”.  Furthermore, my method section was “very well written, clear and could be easily replicated” and an overall good results section with the “statistics presented and interpreted correctly”.

However, my conclusion needed to be more comprehensive and an evaluation of the literature presented in my introduction would have been beneficial.  Despite my hypothesis being “clear and logical”, it could have been more explicit on what research I was basing it on.

Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Questionnaire Report Feedback

Observational Report Reflection

I am pleased with the result of my report (65/100, 2:1) however I would have liked a higher grade to keep up the high standard of work since I just received a 78/100 on my poster assignment yesterday. I don’t agree 100% with the feedback given, only because it’s slightly contradictory.

Firstly, the point of ‘where was the study conducted’ was actually answered in my report as I said my observation was conducted on a pelican crossing. Next time, I’ll be more specific like I was in my method section and specify the location of the pelican crossing.

After including my rationale in the introduction like we were reminded to do in lectures, I was then told in my feedback that it would be ‘more appropriate to make this sort of point in the discussion’. This contradicted what I was previously told and then in the marking criteria for the assignment, I was given 4/8 for my introduction with the general comment ‘Rationale provided and it is largely clear how the study follows on from previous work’ which further contradicts he feedback I was given.

However, I do agree with the points of including the hypothesis in my abstract and making some studies in my introduction more detailed as I did only talk about the results for a couple studies; but this was only due to hitting the word limit.

My referencing was once again strong due to me acting upon the feedback given to me in my diagnostic literature review. My observational report was ‘nice overall’ with a ‘few lapses of clarity’. This feedback provided will help me in my upcoming assignment of a questionnaire report.

Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Observing gender differences in crossing behaviour – crossing during the red man phase

A First in my Poster Assignment

After 4 long weeks, I received the results from one of my most recent assignments –  a poster on the medical and social models of disability in education. The process of completing this assignment didn’t quite go according to plan but thankfully I got a first! So let’s split this blog post in two: the writing process and a reflection on the feedback given.

The Process

I wrote this assignment during my very hectic reading week (although hectic would be an understatement). You’d expect reading week to be somewhat care-free and relaxing but no, mine played out a little differently.

On the day I planned to start my poster, I caught a sickness bug which I thought I had got away with after both my family and my flatmates had it the week previous. This left me bed stricken and unable to start my poster, leaving me a whole day behind schedule. Even though I didn’t feel 100% better the next day, I still decided to start as I knew the deadline was looming.

At 12pm (12 hours before the deadline) I realised that I had missed a vital aspect of my poster, applying the medical and social models to education. I had spent a total of 27+ hours writing it and then had to stay up until 3am to finish rewriting it which I can only blame myself for. Next time, I’ll hopefully not be sick!

Reflecting on my given feedback

The topic was something we had previously covered in lectures and had really interested me in how something like disability could be viewed from two completely different views/models. I am very pleased with my grade of 78/100 which is a great improvement from my first assignment in which I achieved a 2:1 (65/100).

I acted upon the feedback I was given last time which resulted in my referencing being perfect due to me putting a comma after ‘et al.’ and checking that all journal names were italicised.

A major strength of my poster was how ‘every aspect of the poster had been addressed with care and considerable attention to detail’. The range and depth of information in my poster was ‘excellent’ and also went into a ‘reasonable level of detail while keeping arguments reasonably concise’.

The written style was also a real strength of my poster with the presentation and layout being very clear and attractive. Something to improve on is ‘providing a link between the introduction and the main sections’.

My poster is a very pleasing first assignment that I should ‘aim to build on’ during my degree and provides me with a good basis to further improve. Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Medical and social models of disability in education – are either helpful?

Reflecting on Feedback: My First Assignment

On Friday, I received the results for my first assignment: Review recent research literature on bullying (including bullying roles) among school children. I found the topic very engaging since I haven’t previously learnt about bullying from a psychological point of view. I am very pleased with my grade of 65/100, which is equivalent to a 2:1, mainly due to it being my first assignment at university level.

I completely agree with the feedback given to me as looking back, the structure of the first few paragraphs could have been written more clearly but this was mostly due to me being unsure of how to start writing a literature review. To advance my work, I would create a plan including references to improve the organisation and flow of the assignment.

There is a lot of room for improvement especially since I made a few basic mistakes such as forgetting to italicise all journal names, not putting a comma after ‘et al.’ and ensuring there are quotation marks for all direct quotes. These mistakes could simply be overcome by proof-reading my work more throughout the writing process and getting someone else to read it and acknowledge any errors that I may have made.

My main strength in this assignment was my “critical awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of some of the studies and how this may fit with future research needs”; this, along with my “well written and concise conclusion”, helps reinforce my understanding of the topic and gives me the confidence and framework I’ll need for my future assignments.

Here is a link to my assignment with the comments, feedback and grade given:

Diagnostic Literature Review Feedback