Assignment 1 Reflection: Research Proposal Draft Feedback

Assignment 1 Reflection: Research Proposal Draft Feedback
(Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle, 1988)
1. Description
Assignment 1 required me to submit the first draft of my research proposal, which included the title, background and rationale, aims and hypotheses, study design, and sampling technique. After submission, I received my detailed feedback from the supervisor. My total score was 59%, which reflected that I had demonstrated understanding but still needed to make significantimprovemt..
The feedback noted that while my title was clear and relevant, my background lacked recent references and did not clearly identify knowledge gaps. The research aims were described as mostly aligned with the topic but required stronger linkage to the main objectives. My study design was correctly chosen (cross-sectional), but I needed to justify it better with supporting references and critical discussion of its limitations. Finally, the sampling technique section was marked down for being presented in bullet points rather than paragraphs and for missing supporting literature.
2. Feelings
Receiving this feedback was emotionally difficult. I felt disappointed and discouraged, especially when I saw my mark of 59%. I had worked very hard on the proposal and truly believed I had done well. Seeing such a low score made me question my writing ability and whether I was on the right track academically. For a few days, I felt frustrated and slightly defeated. However, after sitting with the feedback and reflecting, I began to see it as an opportunity for growth rather than failure.
Meeting with my supervisor, Professor Hendricks, after receiving the feedback helped me regain perspective. She reminded me that formative feedback is part of the research learning process. Her reassurance and constructive guidance motivated me to improve and approach revisions with a clear plan.
3. Evaluation
Although the feedback initially made me feel disheartened, it turned out to be one of the most valuable learning experiences of this journey. It helped me identify specific weaknesses in my work such as the lack of recent references, insufficient justification of methodology, and inconsistent grammar. More importantly, it highlighted areas of strength, including my clear understanding of the TB screening and preventive therapy context, and the relevance of my topic to public health challenges in South Africa.
I realised that the feedback was not a reflection of my ability but of the need to refine my academic writing, critical analysis, and referencing skills. It also taught me the importance of reading widely and ensuring that my proposal remains updated with current guidelines and literature.
4. Analysis
Through reflection, I recognised that I had approached Assignment 1 more from a practical nursing and clinical perspective than from a research critical standpoint. My background section focused on the issue of TB but lacked a clear synthesis of what was known, what was missing, and why the study was needed which is a crucial element.
I also realised that my use of bullet points was incorrect and should never be done in research proposal . The feedback taught me the importance of writing in narrative paragraphs that show reasoning and flow. It pushed me to revisit current TB guidelines.
Additionally, this reflection made me appreciate the value of constructive criticism. By discussing the comments with my supervisor and classmates, I began to understand how peer and expert feedback can significantly improve the quality of academic work.
5. Conclusion
From this experience, I concluded that feedback is an essential part of academic growth. Although the initial mark was disappointing, it became the turning point in my development as a researcher. It forced me to slow down, revisit key areas of my proposal, and focus on producing work that is not only correct but also critical, well-referenced.
It also helped me prepare better for my proposal presentation, as I was able to revise my slides and improve the clarity of my rationale, aims, and design before presenting to the panel. In hindsight, this feedback improved both my confidence and the overall quality of my research.
6. Action Plan
Moving forward, I plan to:
• Review all feedback carefully after each submission and discuss it with my supervisor for clarity.
• Strengthen my literature review and referencing by using updated journal articles and official guidelines (WHO, NDoH, etc.).
• Write in full paragraphs rather than bullet points to improve critical flow.
• Revisit examples of cross-sectional studies to better justify my methodological choices.
• Keep a feedback reflection log to track improvements and maintain self-awareness throughout the research process.
Although the feedback initially made me feel sad and doubtful, it ultimately gave me the tools .It reminded me that research is a process of continuous learning, and that perseverance and openness to critique are what truly shape a competent researcher.