This is the instructions of the assessment. I wrote it already need some to edit and add some references to my assessment.
The logbooks are a place for you to critique and analyse some of the information covered in the Osteopathic Studies 10 practical classes. Compare the information covered in class to information from research papers, osteopathic books and medical texts. This process will help you develop a critical approach towards information from various sources. You will write a reflection on the information/material shared on a topic and will address each question (Q1, Q2). Your writing should be from both the analytical (i.e. evidence based, Q1) and from a personal perspective (Q2). Use 600-900 words for Q1.
See the template page for an example of how your logbook should be organised. Please note that you mustinclude appropriate references using the APA format.
| Marking Criteria Total marks = 30 marks | |||
| 1 | Syntax, grammar, legibility, and referencing. | 5 marks | |
| 2 | Critically appraise the material with reference to the literature. | 10 marks | |
| 3 | Demonstrate an understanding of osteopathic principles in practice. | 10 marks | |
| 4 | Demonstrate an understanding of the application of the material. | 5 marks | |
Topic 1: Respiratory or Concussion (Terry Vardy)
Topic 2: Lymphatics (Cynamon Thomas)
Topic 3: TBC
Topic 3: Autonomics and Cardiovascular (Michael Solano)
Q1: Discuss the material you have gained in this class within the context of other osteopathic research and evidence-based medicine.
Q2: What clinical implications does this material have for you?
Hints and tips:
– Use academic language when formulating your critique (www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/being-critical) and appropriately cautious language when making claims (www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/using-cautious-language).
– The aim of this assessment is the critique and analysis the content of the Osteopathic Studies 8 master classes. Examples of questions to consider are:
o “what is the evidence for this information?”
o “how strong is this evidence?”
o “is this true?” and “how true is this?”
o “how appropriate is this to use on patients?”
– Keep critique and reflections on the quality of presenting or the personal aspects of the presenter to a minimum (these are more suited to the Unit Feedback process or can be emailed directly to the UA or CC). Think about separating the person from the content.
– Critique regarding the presenter that would be appropriate may include factors such as degree of provision of evidence sources, the quality of the evidence sources provided, the use or interpretation of evidence sources, the degree of use of anecdotal or clinical experience, the accuracy of knowledge of anatomy and physiology, the encouragement of critical thinking, etc.
– Maintaining an ‘emotional distance’ can help when formulating critique. Recognise your emotional responses to the content. You can acknowledge your thoughts and feelings about the content, but do not let the critical analysis be biased by these.
– Include evidence that is both FOR and AGAINST the content shared by the presenter. Avoid cherry picking supportive information only. It is appropriate to acknowledge gaps in the literature.
– When using sources to support your arguments or critique, include acknowledgement of the quality or strength of the sources. This will help provide a more complete picture of the evidence available and show critical analysis of all sources.
– See the discussion board for more information.
Log book template
Topic:
Claim made:
Q1: Discuss the material you have gained in this class within the context of other osteopathic research and evidence-based medicine.
Write reflection here, 600-900 words
Q2: What clinical implications does this material have for you?
Write reflection here
Total word count:
References:
List your references here. Use APA formatting.
