Your assignment for this module has 2 parts, A and B.
Please read through the information about both sections below. You will submit both sections together on the date indicated in the timetable (and on page 2 of this information sheet).
Part A: Literature search and narrative review (approx. 1800 words, 70 marks)
Choose an area of intervention in which you are interested.
- Outline a question about the evidence base for this topic (about 50 words) This should be in the form of a PICO question (8 marks)
- Carry out a literature search on this topic (about 200 words) Report the search terms you used and the databases that you searched. Say how many articles you found, and how you refined your search, if appropriate. You may want to present this in table form. We are looking for your ability to end up with a manageable number of the most relevant (20 marks) (Note: Do not use Speechbite for this assignment and remember that Google scholar and Starplus are search engines, as opposed to databases). An example of how you can present this is given at the end of the Unit 4 overview.
- Write a narrative literature review about your topic (about 1,300 words) This might include: information about the theoretical background / the rationale underlying the intervention AND / OR a review of some of the research studies that evaluate the intervention. (36 marks) (Note: Remember in a narrative review you are not just describing the studies you find, but you are trying to help your reader understand what the research is telling us overall. Whereabouts in the hierarchy of evidence do these studies lie? Are there some findings that seem more valid and replicated than others? What are the unanswered questions?)
- Reflect on the evidence you have found and how this influences your thinking about the intervention (about 200 words) If you needed to make a decision about whether or not to implement the intervention you have discussed, does the evidence feel robust enough for you to act upon, or do you need more evidence? If so, what kind of evidence would be useful? Be as concrete and specific as possible. (6 marks)
Part B: Critical appraisal (approx. 1200 words) (30 marks)
Select one of the research papers below and critically appraise the study.
- Lousada, M., Jesus, L. M., Hall, A., & Joffe, V. (2014). Intelligibility as a clinical outcome measure following intervention with children with phonologically based speech–sound disorders. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 49(5), 584-601.
- Morlock, L., Reynolds, J. L., Fisher, S., & Comer, R. J. (2015). Video modeling and word identification in adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 31, 101-111.
- Ha, S. (2015). Effectiveness of a parent-implemented intervention program for young children with cleft palate. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 79(5), 707-715.
- Eriksson, K., Hartelius, L., & Saldert, C. (2016). On the diverse outcome of communication partner training of significant others of people with aphasia: an experimental study of six cases. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 51(4), 402-414.
Remember too that “critical” does not mean negative in this sense, but rather an analysis of both strengths and limitations – all these articles have both!
Please also check the material in the Assignment Information folders in your Programme MOLE course to ensure that you meet the requirements presented there. This includes referencing carefully, adhering to confidentiality guidelines and avoiding plagiarism.
