Research Methods for Health Sciences: HE201
Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo Campus
Department Health Sciences, Faculty of Science
(This schedule is tentative and subject to minor changes)
Course Instructor: Dr. Laurie A. Manwell
Copyright © 2017 Laurie A. Manwell
Email: lmanwell@myls.wlu.ca (through MyLS only)
Term/Year: Fall 2017
Class Time & Room: Section A: Mon. & Wed. 10:00-11:20 am; Room BA210
Section B: Mon. & Wed. 2:30 - 3:50 pm; Room N1044
Office Hours: Mon. & Wed. 11:30-12:30 and by appointment in BA546
Phone: 519-884-0710 x3900
Website: https://mylearningspace.wlu.ca
Teaching Assistants: Martha Ta (mta@myls.wlu.ca) and Emily Churchill (echurchill@myls.wlu.ca)
Course Description:
The various methods used in the collection and analysis of data in the field of health sciences are
examined, including: research design, sampling, experiments and surveys. Reliability and validity may
also be considered. In addition to the critical evaluation of research methodology, relevant issues of
medical, ethical, social, and political significance will be discussed. (3 h lecture; 0.5 credit)
Prerequisites: HE101 and registration status: Year 2: Honours BSc Health Sciences
Course Objectives:
We will address these topics using both the Socratic and Scientific methods with the following objectives:
1. To develop a multidisciplinary perspective of health research, including the four pillars identified
in the CIHR Act: biomedical research, clinical research, health services and policy research, and
social, cultural, environmental and population research.
2. To develop and apply the principles of critical thinking to scientific claims, including the ability to
question and challenge the scientific method in theory and practice.
3. To develop an appreciation of how the neurophysiology of the brain integrates the physical, mental,
and social domains of health, from basic molecular processes within cells to the neural pathways
that regulate the body and all social interactions, and the implications for individuals and society,
including diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of various health-related conditions and social
policy issues.
4. To develop transferrable skills essential for academic and workplace success, including critical
analysis, knowledge synthesis/application, collaboration, and oral/written communication skills.
1
Required Resources:
Brafman, O. & Brafman, R. (2009). Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior. London: Virgin.
Devlin, A.S. (2018). The Research Experience: Planning, Conducting, and Reporting Research.
California, USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Optional Resources:
American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th edition). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Additional readings may be assigned throughout the course. The readings will be posted on
MyLearningSpace (MyLS). Students may also be required to retrieve information from various websites
and the library. There is a course website at https://mylearningspace.wlu.ca/ which is password protected
and is mandatory for meeting course objectives, including assignments and lecture preparation. Students
are expected to familiarize themselves with the website and to contact the instructor, GTA and classmates
between classes, especially in preparation for group project presentations.
Formal Assessment:
The purpose of this course is to engage students in an overview of key concepts, empirical approaches and
theoretical perspectives in research methods for the health sciences and critically examine their
significance and impact on society. Engagement and critical analysis are core components of this course;
thus, there will be a significant amount of reading, writing, and discussion required to analyze these ideas.
This course requires autonomy, initiative, and innovation, which need to be reflected in the research
projects to receive at least a B level grade. To receive an A+, students should demonstrate as strong
understanding of the course content as it relates to society, particularly in the team presentations and
essays. In general, grades advance or drop depending on both content and style; for an A-/A/A+, the
project must demonstrate exceptional thoughtfulness, reasoning, and presentation. “A” projects involve
difficult and time-consuming work – and a tremendous investment in your education and development! A
solid “B” is a mark of achievement which reflects critical reasoning and/or thorough research and solid
writing skills. In cases of medical or otherwise compassionate circumstances, students should contact the
instructor and/or TA to determine what arrangements can be made to ensure that course requirements are
met and students successfully pass the course. Course requirements are as follows:
1) Midterm Test 1: 20%
- Wed. Oct. 18 in class
2) Ethics Tutorial: 5% (TCPS2 certificate)
- Fri. Sept. 29 by 11 pm (Dropbox only)
3) Research Measures Package: 5%
- All research measures due: Oct. 16 @ 11 pm (Dropbox)
- Completed research measures package due: Oct. 30 in class (Hardcopy)
4) Team Research Project and Presentation: 45%
- Team 40%; Individual 5%
o Proposal due Oct. 3 (Dropbox & Hardcopy signed in class)
o Presentation (15%) Weeks 11-12 (Dropbox & In-Class)
o Report (25%) Weeks 11-12 inclusive (Dropbox & Hardcopy)
5) Midterm Test 2: 20%
- Mon. Nov. 20 in class
6) Participation Assignments: 5%
- Assigned randomly and will account for a total of 5% (not 5 ‘marks’) of the final grade
2
Class Attendance, Participation and Professionalism:
Each week students are expected to participate fully and in a professional manner; for example, reviewing
assigned readings, offering and challenging ideas, asking questions and demonstrating interest and respect
towards peers and their ideas. Material covered in this course is conceptually difficult, highly technical,
and often quite different from everyday language for talking about health. In addition, a significant portion
of your final mark will be based upon collaborative work in and outside of class. Consequently, regular
class attendance is expected. Computers and other electronic devices are permitted in class ONLY for
course-related work; any other use will be regarded as unprofessional and indicative of non-participation
and graded accordingly. Students are to be respectful of and engage fully in the university learning
environment as a place to demonstrate higher order thinking skills involving analysis, evaluation and
synthesis of knowledge. If you miss a class, you are responsible for obtaining missed notes,
announcements, or any other information relevant to the course, the assignments, or the exams from a
classmate before the next class. It is not an instructor’s responsibility to provide information presented in
class because a student has missed one or, as is more often the case, several classes.
Late Policy and Missed Assignments
The penalty for late assignments handed in on the same day but AFTER the designated time period (i.e.
during class) is 2%. After that, a 5% penalty is applied each day (including Saturday and Sunday) up to a
maximum of 5 days after which a mark of zero will be applied. A Verification of Illness Form (VIF) is
necessary for all academic accommodations and can be found on the university’s website. A missed
assignment without valid medical documentation will result in a mark of “zero” – without exception. VIFs
must be submitted within 24 hours after the assignment. All VIFs are kept in the student’s record.
Midterm Tests: 20% each
The midterm tests will be in class on Wed. Oct. 18 and Mon. Nov. 20 and the content will cover course
readings and lecture material. More details will be covered in class. The policy of the Health Sciences
(HE) program is not to offer deferred midterm examinations (please refer to policy here:
https://legacy.wlu.ca/documents/57398/HE_midterm_deferral_policy_2014.1.pdf). In the event of a missed
midterm exam, a mark of zero will be recorded for that exam. In the event that a student produces official
documentation of a legitimate medical problem (i.e., doctor’s note) occurring on the day of the midterm
exam, marks for that exam will be added to the weighting of the subsequent exam (i.e., now worth 40%) or
subsequent assignment(s) at the discretion of the instructor.
Ethics Tutorial (TCPS2) Certificate: 5%
Students are required to complete the online tutorial TCPS2, which stands for the Tri-Council Policy
Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2nd Edition, and that can be found at
http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/education/tutorial-didacticiel/
Detailed instructions for TCPS2 completion are included at this link which will approximately 2-3 hours to
complete all 10 modules. The TCPS2 allows you to save your progress as you go, should you choose to
complete it in more than one session. Upon successful completion, please save a PDF copy of your
certificate of completion, and submit it electronically via dropbox (in MyLS) by 11 pm on Fri. Sept. 29.
Students may complete and submit this certificate at any time prior to this date. However, failure to submit
by this date and time will result in a grade of zero for this assignment.
3
Team Research Project Assignment: 45% (40% Team; 5% Individual)
This project is designed to engage students in the research process by designing, testing, and analyzing a
research measure (e.g., Devlin (2018, Ch. 5). In teams of five, students will conduct a project to create and
evaluate the quality of a research measure (e.g., reliability and validity), present their findings in a class
presentation, and write a manuscript-type report. Each team will research a topic in health and do the
following: 1) identify and define a problem of interest in health research, 2) state a research
objective/question/hypothesis to be addressed, 3) select an appropriate measurement design, 4) assess the
measure’s internal consistency, reliability, and validity, 5) and discuss various interpretations of the
research project findings. Students will have time in class to work with the instructor/peers on the project.
Step 1: Students will form teams of five, discuss potential research topics, conduct a literature search, and
then identify and define a problem of interest in health research for the project. (see Devlin (2018) Ch. 1-2)
Proposal: Teams will submit a one-page maximum project proposal with all student names, IDs, and
signatures, in class on Mon. Sept. 25 and will be returned by Wed. Sept. 27 class as Approved,
Conditionally Approved, or Not Approved by the instructor; the date that the group is assigned to present
on will be included. All projects must be approved by the instructor in writing to receive a final grade;
failure to submit a proposal on time will result in an immediate deduction of 10% of the final grade.
Step 2: Teams will state a research objective in 50–100 words, state a research question in 10-30 words,
and state any appropriate research hypotheses (e.g., the Null (H o) hypothesis and any Alternative (Ha)
hypotheses to be addressed. (see Devlin (2018) Ch. 3-4)
Step 3: Teams will select an appropriate measurement design based on their literature search, research
approach, and consideration of measure and survey research tool criteria. Teams will create and submit a
research measure in word-doc format that fits on one page (minimum 1.5 cm margins and 10 pt font) in
Dropbox by Oct. 16 (by 11:59 pm). (see Devlin (2018) Ch. 5-6).
Step 4: Teams will assess the measure’s internal consistency, reliability, and validity and compare it to any
other measures included in the research package. (see Devlin (2018) Ch. 10)
Step 5: Teams will discuss various interpretations of the findings of the research project and present them
to the class in a brief oral presentation and in a manuscript-type report. (see Devlin (2018) Ch. 11)
Presentation (15%): The maximum time of presentation is 8 minutes – no exceptions – with up to 2
minutes for Q & A with the instructor and class. The presentation must provide a brief summary of the
research objective, measurement quality, merits and limitations of the research findings, and its
significance to society. Students must provide the instructor with any presentation aids (e.g., powerpoint
slides) a minimum of 48 h prior to presentation and in a format that is compatible with Windows 10.
Failure to do so will result in a 10% penalty and risk of 0% for the presentation if there are problems
during the presentation session. There will be no re-scheduling of presentations for any reason.
REFER TO APPENDIX A FOR MARKING RUBRIC
Manuscript (25%): The manuscripts must include a minimum of 4 primary and 4 secondary sources, be
written in APA style, be between 6-8 pages (not including title page, references, tables, figures, and
appendices), and have the following formatting: 2.0 spaced, 12-pt Times Roman Font, 1” margins all
around. Must address all five steps outlined above in the following sections in this order: Abstract
(separate page), Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, References, Tables, Figures, and Appendices.
REFER TO APPENDIX B FOR MARKING RUBRIC
4
Research Measures Package: 5%
Students are required to complete a research measures package as part of learning about research methods
and it will include their own measures and measures from students in both sections of HE201. This is a
critical component of the team research project and thus it is imperative that all students complete it as
accurately as possible and on time: failure to do so will result in a mark of zero. Students must submit their
team research measures by Oct. 16 and complete and submit the course research measures package by Oct.
30. Measures must be submitted on Dropbox and be formatted accordingly: minimum 12-pt font, 0.75”
margins all around, and include any required scoring instructions (e.g., reverse score items) on a separate
page.
Participation Assignments: 5%
Students will complete in-class assessments that will be assigned throughout the term and will account for
a total of 5% (not 5 ‘marks’) of the final grade. Please note: Travel plans are not a valid reason to miss an
assignment and will result in a mark of “zero”.
Hints for Success:
1. Read the course syllabus completely and carefully. Refer to it throughout the term.
2. Read the textbook chapters before the material is presented in lecture.
3. Attend all lectures; print the lecture slides and make notes during and after lectures.
4. Use the lecture note outlines and any material posted on MLS made available to you.
5. Use textbook review questions as a diagnostic assessment of how well you know the material.
6. If you are having trouble with the learning checks, the course, or with the material, come and see either
your GTA or myself immediately – don’t wait until it is too late.
7. Refer to marking rubrics when working on assignments; they explain exactly how you will be marked.
8. Join a research project team and begin collaborating early in the term. Keep in constant and consistent
communication through MLS in a highly professional and cooperative manner. If any concerns arise please
try to resolve them in an open and supportive manner and please do approach the instructor if you require
any assistance in doing so. The purpose of the team project is to practice professional collaboration on a
topic that is meaningful, interesting and highly educational. It is also meant to be a challenging and
enjoyable experience for all involved! 
Learning Contract:
Everyone has the right to learn and the responsibility not to deprive others of this right. Every student is
accountable for his or her own actions. Please let the instructor know immediately if you have a problem
that is preventing you from performing satisfactorily in this class. Each student and his/her success in this
course is very important to me; please help me help you achieve your professional and personal goals for
this course. Please consider the following for student success in the course:
- Attend all scheduled classes and arrive on time prepared with lecture notes.
- Please be quiet and respectful if you absolutely must arrive late and/or leave early.
- Laptops and other devices are restricted to class-related activities only.
- Disruptive behaviour is not tolerated and students will be required to leave.
5
Policy 9.3: Guidelines for Technology use During Class and During Course:
Instructors are permitted to regulate use of technology for social communicative purposes. Students who
require technology as an assistive device for learning are encouraged to register with Accessible Learning.
Obligations of Instructor. Instructors are required to make explicit on course syllabi Guidelines for
Technology use During Class and During Course Assessments and make explicit any consequences for
inappropriate use of technology that are in addition to those outlined in Polices 9.1 and 12.2.
HE201 Policy: The use of audio/or video recording devices during lecture is strictly prohibited. Please turn off
all electronic devices at the start of class. Failure to do so can result in being asked to leave the classroom.
Students are permitted to use laptops strictly for the purpose of note-taking. Use of laptops for reasons other
than note-taking is strictly forbidden. Any behaviour that is disruptive to student learning in the classroom,
including off-task use of technology, will not be tolerated and students will be asked to leave. Students who are
asked to leave will be responsible for all material covered during their absence.
Use of visual or audio images. Image, video, and audio recording of instructors or in -class activities are
strictly prohibited without the prior written consent of the instructor, students, and/or Accessible Learning.
Use of technology during assessments. Students may be permitted to use technological devices during
assessments only under the direct and written permission, in advance of the exam or test date, of the course
instructor or Accessible Learning.
Obligations of Students. Students are encouraged to make informed decisions regarding technology use during
class and assessment. Some devices are distracting during learning and can disrupt the learning of others. Off task use of technology (e.g., communicating with friends/family; using social networking sites; playing games;
accessing the internet on websites not related to the course; reading an electronic book that is not related to the
course; playing music or video, etc.) during instruction which are distracting to self or others are prohibited.
Copyright. The educational materials developed for this course, including, but not limited to, lecture notes and
slides, handout materials, examinations and assignments, and any materials posted to MyLearningSpace, are
the intellectual property of the course instructor. These materials have been developed for student use only and
they are not intended for wider dissemination and/or communication outside of a given course. Posting or
providing unauthorized audio, video, or textual material of lecture content to third-party websites violates an
instructor’s intellectual property rights, and the Canadian Copyright Act. Recording lectures in any way is
prohibited in this course unless specific permission has been granted by the instructor. Failure to follow these
instructions may be in contravention of the university’s Code of Student Conduct and/or Code of Academic
Conduct, and will result in appropriate penalties. Participation in this course constitutes an agreement by all
parties to abide by the relevant University Policies, and to respect the intellectual property of others
during and after their association with Wilfrid Laurier University.
6
SCHEDULE OF TOPICS
Lecture
WK1:
Sept. 11,13
WK2:
Sept. 18,20
WK3:
Sept. 25,27
WK4:
Oct. 2,4
Oct. 10-13
WK5:
Oct. 16,18
WK6:
Oct. 23, 25
WK7:
Oct 30,
Nov 1
WK8:
Nov. 6, 8
WK9:
Nov. 13,15
WK10:
Nov. 20,22
WK11:
Nov. 27,29
WK12:
Dec. 4, 6
Topic
- Course Introduction / Syllabus Review
- Research, Biases in Thinking, and the Role of Theories
- Introduction to Health Research and Research Paradigms
- Diagnosis Bias: Decision Making Processes in Health
- Generating and Shaping Ideas: Tradition and Innovation
- Value Attributions & Loss Aversion: Decision Making
in Administration, Behavioral Economics, and Health
- Tradeoffs and Commitment in Public Policy Decisions
- Research Design Approaches and Issues
- Conducting a Scoping Review
- Ethics and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) Process
- TCPS2: 5% (Sept. 29 @ 11pm) (Dropbox)
- Measures and Survey Research Tools
- Value Attributions and Perception in Scientific Research
- Order and Priming Effects in Experimental Studies
- Predictors of Performance: Scales Versus Interviews
Reading Week – No Classes
- Correlational Research and Qualitative Research
- Diagnosis Bias: Research Controversies in Mental
Health Assessment
- All Research Measures Due: Oct. 16 (Dropbox)
- Midterm 1 Exam: 20% (Oct. 18 in class)
- Experimental Approaches: Between Subjects
- The Chameleon Effect in Diagnosis and Treatment in
Mental Health
- Within, Mixed, Pre-Post Experimental and Specialized
Correlational Designs
- Recruiting Participants
- Research Measures Package: 5% (Oct. 30 in class)
- Organizing Data and Analyzing Results
- Perceptions of Fairness: Intuitive and Deliberative
Judgments in Moral Decisions
- Writing and Presenting Your Research
- Midterm 2 Exam: 20% (Nov. 20 in class)
- Group Dynamics & Real World Decisions in Health
- Research Presentations & Manuscripts (47%)
- Research Presentations & Manuscripts (continued)
- Participation Assignments: 5%
- Personal Construct Theory and Strategies to Reduce Bias
in Decision Making in Healthcare
- Knowledge Translation: Knowledge to Action Cycle
- Course Evaluations
7
Readings
- Devlin: Ch. 1
- Bassil: (pdf)
- Brafman: Preface
- Devlin: Ch. 2
- Brafman: Ch. 1
- Brafman: Ch. 2
- Devlin: Ch. 3
- Halas et al (2016)
- Devlin: Ch. 4
- Devlin: Ch. 5
- Brafman: Ch. 3
- Brafman: Ch. 4
- Brafman: Ch. 4
Sleep In!!!
- Devlin: Ch. 6
- Brafman: Ch. 5
Events
- Course Overview
- Class activity for forming
research project teams
- Example of research project
- Ideas/tips for research
project literature searches and
writing
- Research Project Team
Proposals Due: Sept. 25
- Returned: Sept. 27
- In-class time for research
project Introduction &
Methods section editing and
measure development
Enjoy Your Break!!! 
- Devlin: Ch. 7
- Brafman: Ch. 6
- Devlin: Ch. 8
- Devlin: Ch. 9
- Devlin: Ch. 10
- Brafman: Ch. 7
- Devlin: Ch. 11
- Brafman: Ch. 8
-Brafman: Epilogue
Teams 1-6: Present Nov. 27
Teams 7-12: Present Nov. 29
Teams 13-18: Present Dec. 4
Good luck on final exams and
have a fantastic winter break!!

Important Information for Undergraduate Students
Description of Grades: By now, you are probably familiar with the University’s grading scheme:
A+
A
AB+
B
B-
90-100%
85-89
80-84
77-79
73-76
70-72
C
CD
DF
63-66
60-62
57-59
50-52
0-49
80-100 (A) Excellent An outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior grasp of the subject
matter and an ability to go beyond the given material in a critical and constructive manner. The student demonstrates
a high degree of creativity and/or logical thinking, a superior ability to organize, to analyse and to integrate ideas,
and a thorough familiarity with the relevant literature and techniques.
70-79 (B) Good A more than adequate performance in which the student demonstrates a thorough grasp of the
subject matter, and an ability to organize and examine the material in a critical and constructive manner. The student
demonstrates a good understanding of the relevant issues and a familiarity with the relevant literature and
techniques.
60-69 (C) Satisfactory An adequate performance in which the student demonstrates a generally adequate grasp of
the subject matter and a moderate ability to examine the material in a critical and constructive manner. The student
displays an adequate understanding of the relevant issues, and a general familiarity with the relevant literature and
techniques.
50-59 (D) Poor A barely adequate performance in which the student demonstrates a familiarity with the subject
matter, but whose attempts to examine the material in a critical and constructive manner are only partially
successful. The student displays some understanding of the relevant issues, and some familiarity with the relevant
literature and techniques.
0-49 (F) Fail An inadequate performance.
Adding and Dropping
Important Dates for Course Adding/Dropping and Tuition charges for the Fall 2017 Term:
https://legacy.wlu.ca/calendars/dates.php?cal=1&t=321&y=73
Important Dates for Course Adding/Dropping and Tuition charges for the Winter 2018 Term:
https://legacy.wlu.ca/calendars/dates.php?cal=1&t=322&y=73
Examination Deferrals
The Academic Date section of the Calendar (Printed and Web Site Versions) clearly states the examination
date period for each semester. Students must note that they are required to reserve this time in their
personal calendars for the examinations. The Fall examination period is: December 9-22, 2017. The
Winter examination period is: April 7-25, 2018. Students who are considering registering to write MCAT,
LSAT or GMAT or a similar examination, should select a time for those examinations that occurs outside
the University examination period. For additional information that describes the special circumstances for
examination deferment, please check the following web page: Faculty of Science: Request for Deferred
Final Examination: https://students.wlu.ca/academics/exams/deferred-exams.html
8
Student Awareness of Accessible Learning Centre
Students with disabilities or special needs are advised to contact Laurier’s Accessible Learning Centre for
information regarding its services and resources, ext. 3086. Students are encouraged to review the
Calendar for information regarding all services available on campus. https://alc.wlu.ca/.
Academic and Research Misconduct
Academic misconduct is an act by a student, or by students working on a team project, which may result in
a false evaluation of the student(s), or which represents a deliberate attempt to unfairly gain an academic
advantage. For detailed information on Academic Misconduct please refer to:
https://students.wlu.ca/academics/academic-integrity/index.html.
Plagiarism Detection Software
Wilfrid Laurier University uses software that can check for plagiarism. Students may be required to
submit their written work in electronic form and have it checked for plagiarism.
Learning Services
There is a range of academic learning support services offered at Laurier designed for all students who
want to improve their academic achievement in the classroom. These services include the following
specific areas:
* Central Academic Advising Office
* Mathematics Assistance Centre
* Study Skills and Supplemental Instruction Centre
* Writing Centre
Please access the following web page for detailed information:
https://students.wlu.ca/academics/support-and-advising/index.html.
Laurier Email Account
Our official means of communication is with your Laurier email account. Students are expected to
regularly check their Laurier email account for important notices from the university community. Students
are also expected to send emails to official members of the university community from their Laurier email
account in order to ensure delivery. Emails sent from non-Laurier accounts, such as hotmail, may be
identified as spam and not delivered. Your co-operation is appreciated.
9
APPENDIX A
TEAM RESEARCH PRESENTATION: 15%
Content and Comprehension: /10
0-2: Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work. Does not demonstrate critical
thinking skills, organization, interpretation of primary and/or secondary sources, and/or logical
flow of ideas; no evidence-based arguments presented.
3-4: Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates limited critical thinking skills, organization, interpretation of
primary and/or secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; unclear or incomplete evidence-based
arguments presented.
5-6: Acceptable. Adequate critical thinking skills, organization, interpretation of primary and/or
secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; demonstrates some basic principles learned
throughout the course; some basic evidence-based arguments presented.
7-8: Well done. More than adequate critical thinking skills, organization, interpretation of primary
and/or secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; demonstrates application of content and
critical thinking principles to research project; correct description of experimental findings and
their significance; uses evidence to support ideas as taught during lectures according to Devlin
(2018), Brafman & Brafman (2008), and APA (2013); reason for topic choice is clear and relevant;
advanced evidence-based arguments presented.
9-10: Outstanding performance. Team demonstrates superior critical thinking skills, organization,
interpretation of primary and/or secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; accurate and
thorough description of the experimental findings and their significance; uses evidence to support
arguments as taught during lectures and according to Devlin (2018), Brafman & Brafman (2008),
and APA (2013); engages the audience with insight, critical arguments, and novel and/or unique
perspective; the importance and relevance of the topic are clear and compelling; topic is
meaningful and challenging; exceptional evidence-based arguments presented.
Approach to Project Topic: /10
0-2: Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work. Presentation is unacceptable.
3-4: Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates limited understanding of principles of research methods;
choice of topic and arguments are too simplistic or obvious; unprepared to present; unable to
answer questions.
5-6: Acceptable. Demonstrates adequate understanding of principles of research methods; topic and
presentation format are complimentary; choice of topic and arguments are somewhat cursory but
provides some opportunity for discussion and debate; prepared to present; minimal answers to
questions.
7-8: Well done. More than adequate understanding of principles of learning; topic and presentation
format complement each other; choice of topic are argument are meaningful and relevant; well
prepared to present; well informed answers to questions.
9-10: Outstanding performance. Team demonstrates superior understanding of the principles of research
methods; topic and presentation format enhance each other; choice of topic are arguments are very
significant and compel the audience to re-evaluate their prior knowledge of the topic; more than
well prepared to present; well informed and insightful answers to questions; thoroughly engages
audience in topic and various perspectives; group takes a risk focusing on controversial and/or less
well known information/positions; team is highly constructive and very professional.
Comments:
10
TEAM RESEARCH PROJECT – INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT: 5%
*Peer Evaluation:
/5
0 - 1: Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work; failed to contribute to project.
1.5-2: Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates limited preparation for group work on project; lack of
cooperation and collaboration with group members; missed some group meetings and did not
make-up missed work.
2.5-3: Acceptable. Demonstrates some preparation for group work; interacts with group members in a
cooperative, supportive, and collaborative manner; listens and responds to ideas and offers own
ideas; made up any missed work.
3.5-4: More than adequate preparation and participation in group activities for project; demonstrates
consistent and positive interactions with group members that draw out peer strengths and support
peer areas of learning; openly shares insights and encourages others to reciprocate; equitable
contributions to group work.
4.5-5 Outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior preparation and participation;
demonstrates consistent and positive interactions with group members that both supports and
challenges peers to work outside of their own zone of comfort in ways that lead to success (e.g.,
practicing public speaking with a shyer peer; sharing technical skills in multimedia with peers
rather than just working alone; demonstrating trust and respect in ways that encourages peers to
share radically different ideas without fear of ridicule; sharing drama experience for a reenactment, role play or interactive demonstration with the audience; etc…); consistently engages
with others by respectfully offering and critiquing ideas; equitable contributions to group work.
*On the day of your group’s presentation, each group member is to provide a peer evaluation mark
(out of 5) for each member, including yourself, on this sheet. All of the marks assigned to each
individual – including your self-evaluation mark - will be averaged for a final mark (out of 5).
Your name:_______________________________________________; Your mark:
/5
Peer 1 name:_______________________________________________; Peer 1 mark:
/5
Peer 2 name:_______________________________________________; Peer 2 mark:
/5
Peer 3 name:_______________________________________________; Peer 3 mark:
/5
Peer 4 name:_______________________________________________; Peer 4 mark:
/5
Comments:
11
APPENDIX B
TEAM RESEARCH MANUSCRIPT: 25%
Students:
.
Abstract: /10
The abstract is relevant to the study of health. The abstract is evidence-based, with clear significance, and the
corresponding research hypothesis is clearly and concisely described. The reader can easily understand and
follow the study design, results and conclusions.
0-2:
3-4:
5-6:
7-8:
9-10:
Introduction is not acceptable.
Minimally acceptable.
Acceptable.
More than adequate.
Outstanding.
Comments:
Logical Flow of the Paper: /30
The rationale for the study is based on logical conclusions drawn from the literature review. Introduction
begins with the broad overview of the topic and narrows in on the literature related to the specifics of the
research question, including the degree of integration and synthesis of ideas. The introduction should include a
rationale and clearly and specific hypothesis.
0-6:
7-12:
Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work.
Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates limited writing skills, organization, interpretation of primary and
secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; many grammatical and spelling errors.
13-18: Acceptable. Adequate writing skills, organization, interpretation of primary and secondary sources,
logical flow of ideas, and moderate ability to examine the material in a constructive manner; adequate
understanding of the relevant issues and methods; demonstrates that student has read the assigned
readings and applied the content and critical thinking principles to his/her work; some grammatical
and spelling errors.
19-24: More than adequate writing skills, organization, interpretation of primary and secondary sources,
logical flow of ideas and an ability to organize and examine the material in a constructive manner;
demonstrates that student has read the assigned readings and applied the content and critical thinking
principles to his/her work; uses evidence to support arguments as taught during seminars and
according to relevant research papers; few grammatical and spelling errors.
25-30: Outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior writing skills, organization,
interpretation of primary and secondary sources, and logical flow of ideas; superior development and
execution of ideas; student uses evidence to support arguments as taught during seminars and
according to relevant research papers; student engages the reader with insight, critical arguments, and
novel and/or unique perspective; almost no grammatical or spelling errors.
Comments:
12
Methodology: /15
Are the methods organized under appropriate headings (participants, materials or apparatus, procedure) and is
the study replicable based on the information provided?
0-3:
4-6:
Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work.
Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates familiarity with research methods appropriate to the study of the
proposed aspect of the psychopharmacology of opiates; some understanding for the relevant issues
and techniques.
7-9:
Acceptable. An adequate grasp of the research methods, and a moderate ability to examine the
material in a constructive manner. Adequate understanding of the relevant issues and techniques.
10-12: More than adequate, a thorough grasp of the relevant research methods, and an ability to organize and
examine the material in a constructive manner. Good understanding of the relevant issues and
techniques.
13-15: Outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior grasp of the appropriate research
methods, and an ability to critically address the outstanding question of research in a thorough and
constructive manner.
Comments:
Analysis and Results: /15
Appropriate analytical procedures have been selected and statistics are organized and appropriately reported
according to APA guidelines.
0-3:
4-6:
Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work.
Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates familiarity with the statistical methods, some understanding of
the relevant analyses to be reported.
7-9:
Acceptable. An adequate grasp of the analytical methods reported.
10-12: More than adequate, a thorough grasp of the analytical methods reported.
13-15: Outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior grasp of the analytical methods
and reporting techniques.
Comments:
13
Discussion: /20
The discussion begins with the hypothesis restated, and a brief non-statistical summary of the results, followed
by a discussion of the findings. Results are evaluated within the context of the literature reviewed in the
introduction and implications of the findings are reviewed. Finally, the importance/relevance of findings,
conclusions and limitations and future directions are discussed.
0-5:
Does not meet the minimum criteria for acceptable work.
6-10: Minimally acceptable. Demonstrates limited writing skills, organization and interpretation of findings.
11-15: Acceptable. Adequate writing skills, organization and interpretation of findings. Moderate
understanding of the literature and synthesis of ideas.
16-18: More than adequate writing skills, organization and interpretation of findings, and an ability to
organize and examine the material in a constructive manner. Good understanding of the relevant
issues and a familiarity of the appropriate literature and synthesis of ideas.
19-20: Outstanding performance in which the student demonstrates superior writing skills, organization and
interpretation of findings. Superior development and execution of ideas.
Comments:
Clarity, Writing Style, APA Format: /10
The extent to which APA style was adhered to throughout the proposal, including references, citations, figures,
tables, and formatting of the paper (e.g., failure to use in text citations, reference page, improper use of
quotations, title page does not include running head, etc…)
0-2:
3-6:
format.
7-8:
9:
10:
Not acceptable. Many spelling, typo, or grammatical errors, or deviations from APA format.
Minimally written. Moderate degree of spelling, typo, or grammatical errors, or deviations from APA
Well written. Few spelling, typo, or grammatical errors, or deviations from APA format.
Very well written. Very few spelling, typo, or grammatical errors, or deviations from APA format.
Outstanding writing. Almost no spelling, typo, or grammatical errors, or deviations from APA format.
Comments:
Grade:
/100
14
APPENDIX X
Wilfrid Laurier University Policy 11.14: Responsible Conduct of Research
Approving Authority: President
Original Approval Date: June 27, 2012
Date of Most Recent Review/Revision: N/A
Office of Accountability: VP: Research
Administrative Responsibility: Office of Research Services
https://legacy.wlu.ca/documents/51295/11.14_Policy_for_the_Responsible_Conduct_of_Research.pdf
PURPOSE
1.00 Wilfrid Laurier University considers responsible conduct in research to be an essential component of
academic integrity. As such, the university holds all involved in research at Laurier to the highest standards
of ethical conduct.
DEFINITIONS
2.01. Research includes all aspects of the research process from proposal to published results. This policy
applies to grant supported, internally funded, and unfunded research.
2.02. Responsible conduct implies duties of honest and thoughtful inquiry, rigorous analysis, commitment
to the dissemination of research results, and adherence to professional standards.
SCOPE
3.01 This policy applies to all individuals involved in research under the auspices or jurisdiction of the
university. This includes, but is not limited to, faculty, research chairs, post -doctoral fellows, research
assistants and associates, laboratory staff, and students.
3.02 This policy shall not impede academic freedom and shall not affect or conflict with the provisions of
collective agreements or any relevant legislation.
POLICY
4.01 Duties of Researchers: In their search for and dissemination of knowledge, researchers shall practice
honesty, accountability, openness and fairness. Researchers shall follow all applicable university policies
including 8.1 Conflict of Interest, 11.13 Ethics Review of Research involving Humans and in cases of
research misconduct, 5.14 Safe Disclosure and provisions in applicable collective agreements.
4.02 Breaches of Policy: Breaches of responsible conduct in research include but are not limited to:
•Fabrication of research; • Falsification of research; • Destruction of research records to avoid the detection
of wrongdoing or in contravention of the applicable funding agreement, policies, legislation, regulations,
and professional or disciplinary standards; •Plagiarism; •Republication of one’s own previously published
or unpublished work or data without adequate acknowledgement of the source or justification; •Invalid or
inadequate acknowledgement; •Invalid or inadequate authorship.
15
4.03 All allegations of research misconduct shall follow the procedures outlined in 5.14 Safe Disclosure
Policy or the processes set out in an applicable collective agreement. The privacy of the complainant(s)
and respondent(s) shall be protected to the extent possible as provided under applicable university policy,
collective agreements, and/or legislation.
4.04 In cases where third party funding has been received, the relevant agency shall be informed
immediately of any allegations related to activities funded by the granting agency that may involve
significant financial, health and safety, or other serious risks.
4.05 All complaints must be submitted in writing and signed as per Policy 5.14. Anonymous allegations
will not be accepted.
4.06 When necessary, the university shall take appropriate measures to protect the administration of
research funds (including those provided by third party agencies). Immediate action includes freezing grant
accounts, requiring a second authorized signature on all expenses charged to the researcher’s grant
accounts, or other measures deemed appropriate by the university.
4.07 The university shall take appropriate measures to protect members of the university community in the
event of serious allegations of a threat to health and safety.
4.08. All investigations shall be completed in a timely manner and in accordance with any timelines and
reporting structures required by the applicable granting agency and in accordance with collective
agreements.
RELATED POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND DOCUMENTS
Conflict of Interest Policy (8.1)
Safe Disclosure Policy (5.14)
Use of Animals in Research, Testing and Teaching (11.5)
Research Involving Biohazardous and Radioactive Materials (11.10)
Ethics Review of Research involving Humans (11.13)
Environmental/Occupational Health & Safety (7.1)
Responsible Conduct of Research: Tri-Council Framework
Biosafety Manual
16