Critical Review Handbook Masters in Public Health
Academic Year 2023/24
This handbook is for those of you embarking on the 30 credit Critical Review of the MPH. Refer to Blackboard MPH Programme Community / Dissertation and Critical Review for additional guidance and support. Use this handbook in conjunction with the Programme Handbook and Faculty/University regulations.
Important Contacts
| Course unit leads | |
| Dr Roger Harrison | roger.harrison@manchester.ac.uk |
| Dr Andy Jones | andrew.jones@manchester.ac.uk |
| Programme Director | |
| Professor Arpana Verma | mph.director@manchester.ac.uk |
| Student Support Contact | For help with: |
| shs.assessment@manchester.ac.uk
|
|
| shs.attendance@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.dc@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.mitcircs@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.placements@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.programmes@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.wellbeing@manchester.ac.uk |
|
| shs.hub@manchester.ac.uk |
|
Introduction
Students registered on the MPH programme (not the MRes) have the option of completing a 30-credit Critical Literature Review an alternative to the 60-credit dissertation. This requires students to take ten taught units plus the 30-credit Critical Literature Review (producing the equivalent of 60-credits). The differences in the pathway for this approach, compared with a dissertation are shown in the diagram below.
(N.B. This option does not apply to MRes students)
What is the Critical Literature Review (CLR)
In its simplest form, the CLR is an extended critical essay focusing on a public health research question or problem. The CLR will need to incorporate:-
- A clear research question/problem within which some of the sub-questions might include, for example:
- What is the current knowledge gap?
- What needs to be found out to fully address the question/problem ?
- A clear structure/method for identifying the evidence. This is not to be confused with a more formal and detailed Systematic Review (such as a Cochrane style review)
- Detailed critique and summary of the evidence as a whole, in relation to the original question/problem and what this means in relation to the context/setting
- Discussion/reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence that has been identified to answer the initial question. This then needs to be considered in terms of the strength of the evidence: –
- How much confidence can be placed on these findings?
- What do they mean? How might it differ in different settings/contexts?
- What are the implications of what was found / what ought to happen next
Some students may want to continue to expand and investigate a topic from one of the taught units and assessment. However, the CLR must extend this work, and not simply be the same material presented in a different format. Students are encouraged to reference the assignment and provide a brief description (just several sentences) to explain how the CLR extends the original assignment.
Intended learning outcomes
| Category of outcome | Students should be able to: |
| A. Knowledge and understanding | A1 Describe a specific public health issue and establish a coherent research-related question that forms the foundation of the critical literature review |
| B. Intellectual skills | B1 Use appropriate methodology to obtain the information necessary to address the research question
B2 Use appropriate methodology to synthesise the information collected |
| C. Practical skills | C1 Construct a meaningful synthesis and critical interpretation of the results of information/evidence collected
C2 Explore the implications of the findings of the review |
| D. Transferable skills and personal qualities | D1 Demonstrate the ability to be a reflective and self-directed learner, to accomplish a substantial piece of academic work |
Registering for the 30-credit critical literature review
MPH students will register their preferred option (that is for the dissertation or additional units and the critical literature review) at the start of their final academic year. This process will be similar to that for selecting individual course units. Note that the fees for the critical literature review plus the two additional units, are the same as that for the option of the MPH dissertation.
Process flow chart
We recommend that all students consider the workload implications of the course work for a taught course unit, and their critical literature review. In the majority of cases, part time students are recommended to complete their 10 course units followed by the critical literature review. However, each student will have different circumstances and their own time management plans to consider. Students also need to take in to consideration the workload implications for selecting a course unit which runs in Semester 3 as this is a time when many people complete this final part of the programme.
Do not leave it too late
 |
Once a student has formally registered for the Critical Literature Review, they have to submit this by the Sept at the end of the academic year. In other words, students need to plan carefully for this work, alongside the additional units they must complete. |
Submitting your idea
Students need to complete a short title form to indicate the title and a very brief outline of what they will be focusing on. There are five fixed dates when students can submit the title form. The title forms will not be processed between these dates. These dates reflect the academic timetable, and help account for assessment times and holidays. However, make sure you plan as much time as possible for working on your actual critical literature review. The earlier you start in the academic year, the better.
Title Form submission dates
The Blackboard area for the Dissertation and CLR will include a calendar with the dates/deadlines for each of the opportunities you have to submit your title form (do not confuse this with the submission date for the completed piece of work which is always a date in the first week in September).
Academic supervision
Students will be allocated an academic supervisor soon after registering for the CLR. Students are responsible for making contact with, and introducing themselves to, their allocated supervisor.
Role of the supervisor
The role of the supervisor is to support a student’s academic development. Remember the project is the work of the student and not that of the supervisor. Students will have different needs for support and guidance. Some of the areas a supervisor might help with include:
- Helping students to develop a meaningful time plan for the months ahead
- Supporting the development of the structure of the critical literature review in terms of sections and themes that it includes
- Giving constructive feedback on sections of written work/preliminary drafts. This includes feedback on the general style of writing, appropriate use of references, and the depth of critique/appraisal that the work contains and relevance to the original aims and objectives of the work.
The Supervisor will not provide any comments/feedback on the additional course units that the student is undertaking
In addition:
- Supervisors aim to give feedback to students within 2 weeks of submitting drafts. As a result, it is important that students plan their time and allow for the return time for feedback on their work
- Please do not expect supervisors to be able to give feedback very close to the submission date. Also, this would not provide enough time for students to respond to their comments
- Supervisors are expected to provide 8 – 10 hours of support for the CLR. This includes reviewing student drafts and individual meetings.
N.B Supervisors are asked to let students know if they will be taking annual leave in August/early September. This will help students plan their work and when supervisory support can be provided. It is a good idea for students to clarify this with their supervisor.
Maximising supervision
Students are encouraged to maximise the opportunities for support from their academic supervisor. A few suggestions to facilitate this include:-
- Send supervisors an email as a way of introduction, a time plan, and any immediate concerns/support needs
- Identify specific queries or questions as a way of preparing for a discussion/meeting with the supervisor
- Have a good awareness of the marking template used to assess the final written work (see end of document). Knowing the assessment criteria helps guide a student’s work and supervisory discussion
- Make the supervisor aware of any difficulties affecting the ability to study. Students do not need to specify the detail, but enough to help the supervisor signpost the student to other sources of support.
- It is helpful for any students with issues impacting on their studies, to let their supervisors know.
Raise any issues associated with supervision by contacting Roger.Harrison@Manchester.ac.uk or Andrew.Jones@Manchester.ac.uk
Additional support
All students are encouraged to utilise the My Learning Essentials packages provided through the online UoM library. There are also helpful resources provided in the MPH Programme Community relevant to both the dissertation and the Critical Literature Review.
Word count
The upper word limit for the critical literature review is 5000 (penalties apply at 10% over the maximum). The same marking penalties as for a standard course unit assessment will apply.
Scientific Abstract
The submitted work needs to include a scientific abstract. The abstract is to be a maximum of 300 words. This is not included in the main word count of 5000 for the rest of the submitted work.
Using Appendices
Information in the appendices is not marked by the examiner and is not included in the word count. Therefore, whatever you include in the appendices must not form a considerable component of the work to be marked.
Referencing
The use of referencing will be assessed by the examiners. On this programme, the preferred referencing style is Harvard. However, Vancouver is acceptable. Students must correctly reference their work. Poor approaches to referencing can suggest academic malpractice. Guidance can be found on academic writing and referencing in the Study Skills course within the MPH Programme Community space in Blackboard and from the University My Learning Essentials.
It is essential that students develop correct referencing within their work. There are a number of free online and cloud-based programmes to facilitate this process (including Endnote and Mendeley). Please ensure that the final reference list is produced correctly, especially if you are using an automated process, through Endnote/Mendeley for example.
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
We urge students to be cautious when using a chatbot or AI tool within their learning. Chatbots and AI tools can be useful, but there are a number of risks associated with using them. Please ensure that you are aware of what is permissible use of AI for each assignment. You can utilise AI to generate ideas, key themes, and plan your assessment but not to write your assessment. Do not use AI to generate text, or partial text for use in your assessment unless the assignment brief explicitly states that this is permitted, otherwise use will be deemed academic malpractice. This is academic malpractice because the words and ideas generated are not your own and not an accurate reflection of your learning. Further to this, the words and ideas generated by the chatbot or AI tool may make use of other, human authors’ ideas without referencing them, which is plagiarism. Where a chatbot or other form of AI has been used, make sure you acknowledge that use. Information on how to cite can be found here: https://manchester-uk.libanswers.com/teaching-and-learning/faq/264824 Some units, for example those on AI and technology, permit the use of AI. However, they require you to sign a code of conduct which must be adhered to. Make sure you understand and follow these codes. If you are unclear on what is permissible, speak to the unit lead.
Submitting your completed work
Students need to submit one electronic copy of their assignment using Blackboard. There is a specific submission section on the main left hand menu, one for dissertations and one for the critical literature review. The final submission date is 12:00 noon BST on Thursday the 5th September 2024. Students can submit earlier than this, but they will not get their mark any earlier.
- Students need to submit work as .PDF or .DOC file.
- Ensure that the saved document has the correct formatting and layout, including the generated reference list. If working on a Mac computer, please save the document to a Word or .PDF format
- Use the same format for saving and submitting the file, as for the assignments (i.e. unit code followed by your student number)
- The submission box in Blackboard will become open nearer the final submission date.
Release of marks
Marks are usually released around mid-November and written feedback will be available in Blackboard. Note that the work must be submitted within the same academic year that the student registered for this specific unit.
Marking framework
Students work will be marked using the same process as for a taught unit assignment.
ASSIGNMENT GUIDANCE ON CONTENT AND PRESENTATION
- All assignments should be submitted as word documents or in a rich text format.
- Submit word-processed work as 1.5 spacing and number the pages.
- All students work must have an accurate word count stated at the top left hand corner of their written assignment. Please note that you may lose marks if you do not do this, as per word count below.
- Include your student number in the header of your document as a means of administrative identification. DO NOT WRITE YOUR NAME ANYWHERE IN THE DOCUMENT.
- On Blackboard, name the submission title assignment file / document in the following format: yourStudentNumber_courseCode
- References should be consistently laid out in either Vancouver or Harvard format.
- Ensure you are familiar with the Faculty PGT Assessment Criteria, which can be found in the student handbook
Word Count
Students must adhere to the specified maximum word limit stated.
In accordance with the University Policy on Marking:
Each written assignment has a word limit which you must state at the top of your first page. It is acceptable, without penalty, for you to submit an assignment within a range that is plus 10% of this limit. The assignment will then be marked but 1% will be deducted from this mark for every 100 words over the maximum word limit plus 10%.
e.g. If your maximum word limit is 5,000 words, and you submit your assignment with 5,501 words, you will be penalized 1% of your final mark.
In accordance with accepted academic practice, when submitting any written assignment for summative assessment, the notion of a word count includes the following without exception:
- All titles or headings that form part of the actual text. This does not include the cover sheet/front page or reference list.
- All words that form the actual essay.
- All words forming the titles for figures, tables and boxes, are included but this does not include boxes or tables or figures themselves.
- All in-text (that is bracketed) references.
- All directly quoted material.
Suspected Academic Malpractice
The University of Manchester takes academic malpractice seriously e.g. plagiarism, self-plagiarism, contract cheating, use of artificial intelligence. All assessed student work on the MPH/MRes is electronically screened for plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) and collusion. Any cases where this is suspected will be referred for investigation at Faculty level. Please see the link below:
However, this screening also identifies students who are not referencing their work as carefully or as comprehensively as they should. The most common problem is the incorrect referencing of ‘direct quotes’. Please go to the Study Skills Resource in the MPH Programme Community and ensure that you understand how to reference direct quotes, or you may find yourselves accused of plagiarism in the future. All students are encouraged to utilise these resources.
Submission
All assignments are due at 1.00pm UK time on the day of submission. If you have any technical issues with submitting your assignment you should contact the eLearning team.
Work submitted after the deadline without prior approval will be subject to a late penalty in accordance with the University Policy on Submission of Work for Summative Assessment on Taught Programmes. The penalty applied is 10% of available marks deducted per day/24 hours (from the time of the original or extended deadline), until the assignment is submitted or no marks remain.
Penalties for late submission relate to 24 hours/calendar days, so include weekends and weekdays, as well as bank holidays and University closure days.
The mark awarded for the piece of work will be reduced by:
- 10% of the available marks deducted if up to 24 hours (1 day) late
- 20% of the available marks deducted if up to 48 hours (2 days) late
- 30% of the available marks deducted if up to 72 hours (3 days) late
- 40% of the available marks deducted if up to 96 hours (4 days) late
- 50% of the available marks deducted if up to 120 hours (5 days) late
- 60% of the available marks deducted if up to 144 hours (6 days) late
- 70% of the available marks deducted if up to 168 hours (7 days) late
- 80% of the available marks deducted if up to 192 hours (8 days) late
- 90% of the available marks deducted if up to 216 hours (9 days) late
- 100% of the available marks deducted if up to 240 hours (10 days) late
For work submitted more than 10 days late, it is regarded as a non-submission and will not be marked. In this case a mark of zero will be awarded and normal resit regulations will apply. The sliding scale will only be applied to first-sit submissions. For all referred (resit) assessment, any late submission will automatically receive a mark of zero.
The unit tutor may take the decision to provide you with feedback about your performance, but this will be considered formative feedback only.
FEEDBACK
All students will receive feedback for their assignment through Grademark. Instructions for accessing this can be found in Blackboard (follow the assignment link on the course home page).