BA Child and youth studies

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

Assessment Cover Sheet
Programme title BA Child and youth studies
Module title Literature Review
Student No. 0315402
Assignment No. 1
Question in full Literature review proposal
Word count 491
Date submitted 01/03/18
Checklist
Answer explicitly addresses the question?
Structure: introduction, middle section, conclusion?
Citations in the text using the Harvard referencing system?
All cited sources are listed alphabetically in full in the reference list?
All images are appropriately captioned and referenced?
Images have been formatted to minimise file size?
Word count is within 10% of the target length?
Document has been spell checked and proof read?
File saved as a Word (.doc) or rich text file (.rtf) with the filename format ‘Student number_module initials_assignment number’?
The University of the Highlands and Islands recognises that plagiarism, where deliberately engaged in, is unacceptable and is considered serious academic malpractice.
UHI regulations plagiarism definition: unacknowledged incorporation in a student’s work either in an examination or assessment of material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another. Plagiarism may therefore include:
the use of another person’s material without reference or acknowledgement
the summarising of another person’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation without acknowledgement
the use of the ideas of another person without acknowledgement of the source
copying of the work of another student with or without that student’s knowledge or agreement
use of commissioned material presented as the student’s own.
Please note that any case of suspected plagiarism will be investigated according to current UHI Regulations.
Students are responsible for ensuring the work they submit is their own. If you have any queries you should contact the module leader or your Personal Academic Tutor before submitting your assessment.
Assessment Cover Sheet
Declaration
In submitting this work, I confirm that I have read and understood UHI regulations and am aware of the possible penalties.
I have completed this assigned work by myself, in my own words and using my own notes, figures or rough workings (except where group work specifically forms part of the assignment)
I have acknowledged fully any sources used by means of in-text citations, and the creation of a List of References in the UHI approved system of Harvard referencing system
I have endeavoured to ensure that my work has not been made available for copying by other students (with or without my permission)
In submitting this work for assessment, I agree to be bound by the conditions laid out above, and by the latest version of the UHI academic regulations https://www.uhi.ac.uk/en/about-uhi/governance/policies-and-regulations/regulations
Originality checker (to be completed if Turnitin is used)
I confirm that I received information about the use of Turnitin and was directed to Turnitin training
I understand that this assignment will be submitted to Turnitin for originality checking
Reflect on the process you undertook to complete this assessment including how this met the identified graduate attributes in the module descriptor.
Using all the resources and material available to me I fully diagnosed the task in hand
Note at least 2 areas of development identified in previous assessment feedback and outline how you have addressed these in this submission.
I failed my last attempt, I fully took on board all the notes from previous assignments and worked on the issues one by one. I worked very hard on my citations
Outline any areas you would like feedback on.
As I failed the last assignment I would like feedback on all areas, especially my working title to make sure I get the literature review exactly correct this time
BACYS Assessment Cover Sheet
For staff use only
Lecturer contact number:
Lecturer email:
Feedback/feedforward return date
Feedback
Feedforward
Agreed mark – to be confirmed by Exam Board Final total / 100%
Please attach these pages to the front of your assignment.
Working literature review title :
Does Language and literacy development of deaf and hard of hearing of pre school children in Scotland affect their future?
Findings from a systematic review of the literature
Rationale behind topic choice
The Scottish Council on Deafness (SCoD) tells us the “Every year in the UK 840 babies are born deaf. Every year in Scotland around 75 children are born deaf, around 5 of them with a severe to profound hearing loss” Well my daughter falls into these statistics of the five children in Scotland. Prior to my daughter being born last year, I was ignorant of all the dynamics of deafness. Over the past year, I have realised the complicated matter of a child being deaf. I’ve had many concerns about my daughter’s future especially her language and literacy development. Though it may appear a minority in the population, more and more children are born deaf, escalating the figures (Lederberg 2012). The SCoD (2014) estimates that there are 1,012,000 people in Scotland with some degree of hearing loss, 70% believe as a result of being deaf or hard of hearing, they have not been successful in getting a job. Could this be down to language and literacy skills? Can early intervention change the future for deaf and hard of hearing children?
This literature review aims to discover if deaf children in Scotland do suffer later in life as a result of their language and literacy development. From the literature, a conclusion will be made to discover if hardship later in life can be prevented for deaf children. In our lives we will all come across a person who is deaf or hard of hearing, to have a better knowledge and understanding of their challenges is beneficial to all, in schools, in work or (like me) in personal life.
Methods of research
• Using: Google Scholar, UHI Multi-search, UHI library catalogue, Journal databases
• Using the most current and up to date literature, the review will use resources from no later than 2002. The field of research is looking at the literature from pre-school children from Scotland. However, comparisons will be made against other countries.
• Language and literacy development is most crucial at the early stages of a child’s life. The literature review will focus on this stage and geographical preferences as it narrows down the research to give more of an in-depth and quality review using secondary research.
• The limitations of the review could be; there are more research and information in larger countries such as America. This limits the volume of data to be used in the literature review. The secondary research relies on other person’s findings, which could result in ethical issues. Combining geographical and age restrictions create a minority subject field. Information could be limited therefore not giving the literature review enough depth.
Review Layout
• Abstract
• Introduction
• A systematic review of the literature
• Mythology
• A Scope of the literature
• Discussion
• Ethical considerations
• Conclusion
• References
Indicative bibliography
Lederberg’s (et al) Language and literacy development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children: Successes and challenges (2012)
Language and Literacy Development in Children Who Are Deaf.
Schirmer, Barbara R.
The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Volume 19, Issue 4,
Language and Literacy Development in Children Who Are Deaf or Hearing Impaired by Sandra J Briggle
Early literacy development in deaf children
by Mayer, Connie Christine; Trezek, Beverly J
Developing Preschool Deaf Children’s Language and Literacy Learning from an Educational Media Series by Debbie B. Golos; Annie M. Moses
What Really Matters in the Early Literacy Development of Deaf Children
by Connie Mayer
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 2002, Vol. 33, 172-183.
Developing Preschool Deaf Children’s Language and Literacy Learning from an Educational Media Series by Debbie B. Golos, Annie M. Moses
Work Schedule
Appendix 1.
Date Task to be carried out Reading
12 / 03 / 2018 Reading
Blackboard
Research Lederberg’s (et al) Language and literacy development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children: Successes and challenges (2012)
19 /03 / 2018 Blackboard
Research Language and Literacy Development in Children Who Are Deaf.
Schirmer, Barbara R.
26 / 03 / 2018 Blackboard
Research The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Volume 19, Issue 4,
Language and Literacy Development in Children Who Are Deaf or Hearing Impaired by Sandra J Briggle
Early literacy development in deaf children
by Mayer, Connie Christine; Trezek, Beverly J
02 / 04 / 2018 Blackboard
Preparation for Assignment Lederberg’s (et al) Language and literacy development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children: Successes and challenges (2013)
What Really Matters in the Early Literacy Development of Deaf Children
by Connie Mayer
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 2002, Vol. 33, 172-183.
09 / 04 / 2018 Format Assignment
Blackboard N/A
23 / 04 / 2018 Clear introduction
Scope of Literature
Mythology N/A
30 / 04 / 2018 Discussion
Ethical consideration
Conclusion
Editing and proof reading N/A
References
Lederberg, Amy & Schick, Brenda & Spencer, Patricia. (2012). Language and Literacy Development of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children: Successes and Challenges. Developmental psychology. 49. 10.1037/a0029558.
Papaioannou D, Sutton A, Carroll C, Booth A & Wong R (2010) Literature Searching for Social Science Systematic Reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques, Health Information and Libraries Journal, Vol. 27:2, p114 – 122
Scodorguk. 2014. Scottish Council on Deafness. [Online]. [1 March 2018]. Available from: http://www.scod.org.uk/faqs/statistics/
In-text citation: (Scodorguk, 2014)
UL909660 Literature Review Proposal Feedback
Student Personal Identifier: 0315402 Final Mark (subject to exam board): 28
Days late: 0 Final Grade (subject to exam board): F
Grades:
A (70-100 marks)
B (60-69 marks)
C (50-59 marks)
D (40-49 marks)
F (0-39 marks)
Feedforward:
Overall, you have identified a start point on which to develop your literature review. Your proposal sets out an area of interest for you and you have provided some justification for this. I would advise you to revisit this focus as how does language and literacy development affect the future of deaf and hard of hearing pre-school children in Scotland is extremely wide and I encourage you to relook to your original question and consider narrowing this based upon the literature that you identify. You set out limitations for your review however please see your in-text comments for further guidance on this.
Moving forward it would be beneficial to:
Revisit your limitations to ensure that you have a clear way to move forward with your literature search, you may wish to consider identifying a specific need and/or strategy. For instance, your indicative literature has a particular focus on language and literacy development.
As you continue to search for your literature, it would be beneficial to focus on a clear set of search terms in order to ensure that you are reviewing ALL literature within these.
Revisit the learning materials in Week 3 in relation to framing your literature review question. Work needs to be done here to ensure that you can achieve a review of your identified literature and not an investigation into this topic.
UL909660 Literature Review Proposal Marking Criteria
Criteria A1 (90-100%) A2 (80-89%) A3 (70-79%) B B- (60-63%) B (64-66%) B+ (67-69%) C C- (50-53%) C (54-56%) C+ (57-59%) D D- (40-43%) D (44-46%) D+ (47-49%) F (0-39%)
Title The title clearly reflects the topic and aim of the review.
The title is confusing or ambiguous with regard to the project.
The title contains minor irrelevancies. The title was absent or not appropriate.
Scope Scope of the topic is suitably focused for a review. Scope of the topic is acceptable for a review and a clear focus is identified. Scope of the topic is adequate for the review but may require a clearer focus. Scope of the topic is limited but acceptable or is overly broad and requires a clearer focus. Scope of the topic is not appropriate (either too great or too small) within the constraints of the review.
Introduction and Rationale The purpose of the review is very clear.
There is excellent justification of the chosen topic. The purpose of the review is very clear.
There is very good justification of the chosen topic. The purpose of the review is very clear.
There is good justification for the chosen topic. The purpose of the review is clear.
Justification for the topic is fully covered but not completely convincing. The purpose of the review provides some justification for the chosen topic but lacks clarity and focus. The purpose of the review is unclear with poor justification of chosen topic.
Methods Selection criteria is appropriate, with excellent justification provided.
All aspects of selection and sourcing methods are described in excellent detail. Selection criteria is appropriate, with very clear justification provided.
All aspects of selection and sourcing methods are described well with no obvious omissions. Selection criteria is appropriate, with good justification provided for it.
Key aspects of the selection and sourcing methods are described but with some minor omissions or lack of detail. Some justification for choice of selection criteria exists but aspects of this may be questioned.
Key aspects of selection and sourcing methods are described, but description may be superficial and/or unclear, or have omissions. Choice of selection criteria and limitations is unclear or not justified.
Description of selection and sourcing methods are unclear and inadequate.
Research and Reading Excellent range and depth of research and reading, which uses highly relevant methods/sources and shows innovation and originality. Good research and reading is demonstrated, supporting key arguments or themes, showing some range and depth beyond recommended sources/core texts. Reasonable range of research and reading, which is largely relevant, although restricted to recommended sources/core texts. Validity of some sources may be questionable. Research and reading is either limited in range or drawn from sources of limited relevance or validity. Research and reading is scant and/or irrelevant.
Presentation / referencing Formatting is consistent, error free, and impressive.
Word count is within the approved range.
Appendices are relevant, appropriate, and clearly presented.
The UHI Harvard referencing system is used correctly and consistently throughout.
All references cited in the text are included in the reference list. There are some errors and inconsistencies in formatting.
Word count is slightly outside of the approved range.
Appendices are included but their purpose is not always clear or relevant.
The UHI Harvard referencing system is used but with a number of errors either in the text or in the reference list. Formatting is frequently erroneous or inconsistent.
Word count is significantly
Inappropriate (either too long or too short).
A non-standard or nonapproved referencing system was used and/or there are major errors in referencing both in the text and within the reference list.
Skills in written English Language, grammar, and spelling are correct and appropriate throughout the proposal. There are some errors regarding language, grammar, and spelling. There are frequent and major errors regarding language, grammar, and spelling.
Assignment 2 Guidelines
Assignment 2: Literature Review (80% of module mark)
The literature review is a piece of work where there is extensive reference to related research
and theory on your topic. It is where connections are made between the literature you draw
upon and where you position yourself amongst this literature. Your literature review should
include the following information:
Title of the Review
 The title should effectively describe the main topic of the review, with a carefully
specified focus. You may want to frame this as a question.
Introduction
 You need to include the rationale for doing a review on the topic. Your specific aim
and/or question within the topic should be identified, showing why it is interesting,
thoughtful and worthwhile.
 Indicate briefly the history/context of the topic and identify how your review engages
with current arguments/debates and/or fills a gap in the literature.
 Cite key references to support your case.
Methods
 How the relevant literature was sourced, for instance Google Scholar, UHI
Multisearch, UHI library catalogue, bibliographic searches and/or other databases.
 Your selection criteria including the limits imposed on the review e.g. literature from
2000 onwards only, geographical location, age/gender/ethnicity/social class of
research participants etc.
 Justification for your selection criteria and limitations.
 Critical analysis methods/tools and justification for these.
Review of literature
 Critical and thematic analysis of selected literature.
Conclusions and Recommendations
 Any conclusions based on the overall review of the topic/literature.
 Any recommendations for policy/practice/further research based on the overall
review.
References List and Appendices
 All references cited in your review using the UHI Referencing Guide.
 Any relevant appendices although these are not necessary if not relevant.
The review can be written in essay style (with or without subheadings) submitted with the
graduate attributes cover sheet completed accurately with each page numbered and with
your student ID clearly visible.
The word limit for the review is 3500 words and the deadline is Week 12 – Thursday 3
rd May
2018 by 11:55 pm. The proposal should be submitted electronically via Assignments in
Blackboard.
Literature Review Marking Criteria
Criteria A1
(90-
100
%)
A2
(80-
89%)
A3 (70-79%) B B- (60-63%) B (64-
66%) B+ (67-69%)
C C- (50-53%) C (54-56%) C+ (57-
59%)
D D- (40-43%) D (44-46%) D+
(47-49%)
F (0-39%)
Title The title clearly reflects the topic and aim of the review. The title is confusing or ambiguous with regard to the project.
The title contains minor irrelevancies.
The title was
absent or not
appropriate.
Scope Scope of the topic is suitably focused
for a review.
Scope of the topic is
acceptable for a review
and a clear focus is
identified.
Scope of the topic is adequate for
the review but may require a
clearer focus.
Scope of the topic is limited
but acceptable or is overly
broad and requires a clearer
focus.
Scope of the
topic is not
appropriate
(either too
great or too
small) within
the
constraints of
the review.
Introduction
and Rationale
The purpose
of the review
is very clear.
There is
excellent
justification
of the chosen
topic.
The purpose of the
review is very clear.
There is very good
justification of the
chosen topic.
The purpose of the
review is very clear.
There is good
justification for the
chosen topic.
The purpose of the review is clear.
Justification for the topic is fully
covered but not completely
convincing.
The purpose of the review
provides some justification
for the chosen topic but lacks
clarity and focus.
The purpose
of the review
is unclear
with poor
justification of
chosen topic.
Methods Selection criteria is appropriate, with
excellent justification provided.
All aspects of selection and sourcing
methods are described in excellent
detail.
Selection criteria is
appropriate, with very
clear justification
provided.
All aspects of selection
and sourcing methods
are described well with
no obvious omissions.
Selection criteria is appropriate,
with good justification provided for
it.
Key aspects of the selection and
sourcing methods are described
but with some minor omissions or
lack of detail.
Some justification for choice
of selection criteria exists but
aspects of this may be
questioned.
Key aspects of selection and
sourcing methods are
described, but description
may be superficial and/or
unclear, or have omissions.
Choice of
selection
criteria and
limitations is
unclear or not
justified.
Description of
selection and
sourcing
methods are
unclear and
inadequate.
Critical Analysis As for A2 and
A3 but with a
highly
sophisticated
critique of
existing
literature,
clearly linked
back to the
relevance of
the chosen
topic.
There is an excellent
coverage of relevant
literature from a
range of sources and
journals.
There is a
sophisticated critique
of existing literature
and it is clearly linked
back to the relevance
of the chosen topic.
There is very good
coverage of relevant
literature from a range
of sources and
journals.
There is a highly
developed critique of
existing literature and
it is clearly linked back
to the relevance of the
chosen topic.
The review of the literature is good
and is from a range of sources and
journals.
There is a reasonable critique of
existing literature and it is clearly
linked back to the relevance of the
chosen topic.
There is evidence of
literature having been
reviewed, but this is
descriptive rather than
analytical.
There is an attempt to
critique existing literature,
but the link to the topic could
be stronger.
There is
evidence of
literature
having been
reviewed, but
it is limited or
there is no
evidence of
review.
Critique of
existing
literature is
superficial
and not
sufficiently
related to the
chosen topic.
Research and
Reading
Excellent range and depth of research
and reading, which uses highly
relevant methods/sources and shows
innovation and originality.
Good research and
reading is
demonstrated,
supporting key
arguments or themes,
showing some range
and depth beyond
recommended
sources/core texts.
Reasonable range of research and
reading, which is largely relevant,
although restricted to
recommended sources/core texts.
Validity of some sources may be
questionable.
Research and reading is
either limited in range or
drawn from sources of
limited relevance or validity.
Research and
reading is
scant and/or irrelevant.
Presentation /
referencing
Formatting is consistent, error free, and impressive.
Word count is within the approved range.
Appendices are relevant, appropriate, and clearly presented.
The UHI Harvard referencing system is used correctly and
consistently throughout.
All references cited in the text are included in the reference list.
There are some errors and inconsistencies in formatting.
Word count is slightly outside of the approved range.
Appendices are included but their purpose is not always clear or
relevant.
The UHI Harvard referencing system is used but with a number of
errors either in the text or in the reference list.
Formatting is
frequently
erroneous or
inconsistent.
Word count is
significantly
Inappropriate
(either too
long or too
short).
A nonstandard
or
non-approved
referencing
system was
used and/or
there are
major errors
in referencing
both in the
text and
within the
reference list.
Skills in written
English
Language, grammar, and spelling are correct and appropriate
throughout the review.
There are some errors regarding language, grammar, and spelling. There are
frequent and
major errors
regarding
language,
grammar, and
spelling.

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized