[Type the company name]
RCE2601
Assignment 2
Memo | Due 13
June 2025
NO
PLAGIARISM
[Year]
,Exam (elaborations)
RCE2601 Assignment 2 Memo | Due 13 June
2025
Course
Research and Critical Reason (RCE2601)
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
RCE2601 Assignment 2 Memo | Due 13 June 2025. All questions fully
answered.
Case Study 1: Evaluating Sources for a Literature Review Total: 100 Marks
____________________________________________________________ SCENARIO Sarah
is a postgraduate student researching the impact of artificial intelligence (AI)
on higher education. During her initial literature search, she comes across a
variety of sources: • A blog post written by a technology enthusiast • A
Wikipedia page. • A peer-reviewed journal article • A government report.
Sarah is unsure which sources suit her literature review and needs to make
informed decisions about credibility, relevance, and academic integrity.
_____________________________________________________________________
Instructions: Read the scenario carefully and respond to the THREE TASKS
BELOW. Your responses must demonstrate critical thinking and academic
insight. Support your answers with examples where appropriate. Task 1:
Source Evaluation (40 Marks) 1. Identify which sources Sarah should
prioritise in her literature review and justify your answer. 2. Consider each
source's reliability, authorship, publication process, and academic value in
your response. Identify which sources are credible and should be prioritised.
Justify the exclusion or limited use of other sources. Discuss how each source
type can (or cannot) contribute to a literature review.
Task 1: Source Evaluation (40 Marks)
Sarah, a postgraduate student investigating the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on higher
education, must critically assess the quality and relevance of sources for her literature review.
Evaluating the credibility, authorship, publication process, and academic value of each
source ensures her research meets postgraduate academic standards.
1. Peer-reviewed Journal Article
, ✅ Priority: High – Include
Reliability & Authorship:
Peer-reviewed articles are written by experts in the field and reviewed by other scholars before
publication, ensuring the research is credible, evidence-based, and methodologically sound.
Publication Process:
The peer-review process ensures that the article meets academic and ethical standards, and often
includes empirical data, theoretical frameworks, and critical analysis relevant to Sarah's topic.
Academic Value:
Very high. Peer-reviewed articles are central to academic writing and are essential for building
strong theoretical and empirical foundations.
Contribution to Literature Review:
Such articles offer original research, literature syntheses, and critical discussions on AI in
higher education, which are indispensable for Sarah’s study.
Example:
A journal article from Computers & Education exploring how AI-driven tools affect teaching
strategies would provide credible, citable evidence.
2. Government Report
✅ Priority: Medium to High – Use Selectively
Reliability & Authorship:
Produced by official government agencies (e.g., Department of Higher Education and
Training), often with expert consultation. These are reliable sources of statistical data and policy
insight.
Publication Process:
While not peer-reviewed, government publications go through internal validation and legal
checks, increasing their trustworthiness.
Academic Value:
Moderate to high, especially for policy-related discussions, contextual analysis, or data-driven
background.
Contribution to Literature Review:
Useful for contextualising the socio-political environment, legislation, funding patterns, and
the role of AI in national higher education strategies.
RCE2601
Assignment 2
Memo | Due 13
June 2025
NO
PLAGIARISM
[Year]
,Exam (elaborations)
RCE2601 Assignment 2 Memo | Due 13 June
2025
Course
Research and Critical Reason (RCE2601)
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
RCE2601 Assignment 2 Memo | Due 13 June 2025. All questions fully
answered.
Case Study 1: Evaluating Sources for a Literature Review Total: 100 Marks
____________________________________________________________ SCENARIO Sarah
is a postgraduate student researching the impact of artificial intelligence (AI)
on higher education. During her initial literature search, she comes across a
variety of sources: • A blog post written by a technology enthusiast • A
Wikipedia page. • A peer-reviewed journal article • A government report.
Sarah is unsure which sources suit her literature review and needs to make
informed decisions about credibility, relevance, and academic integrity.
_____________________________________________________________________
Instructions: Read the scenario carefully and respond to the THREE TASKS
BELOW. Your responses must demonstrate critical thinking and academic
insight. Support your answers with examples where appropriate. Task 1:
Source Evaluation (40 Marks) 1. Identify which sources Sarah should
prioritise in her literature review and justify your answer. 2. Consider each
source's reliability, authorship, publication process, and academic value in
your response. Identify which sources are credible and should be prioritised.
Justify the exclusion or limited use of other sources. Discuss how each source
type can (or cannot) contribute to a literature review.
Task 1: Source Evaluation (40 Marks)
Sarah, a postgraduate student investigating the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on higher
education, must critically assess the quality and relevance of sources for her literature review.
Evaluating the credibility, authorship, publication process, and academic value of each
source ensures her research meets postgraduate academic standards.
1. Peer-reviewed Journal Article
, ✅ Priority: High – Include
Reliability & Authorship:
Peer-reviewed articles are written by experts in the field and reviewed by other scholars before
publication, ensuring the research is credible, evidence-based, and methodologically sound.
Publication Process:
The peer-review process ensures that the article meets academic and ethical standards, and often
includes empirical data, theoretical frameworks, and critical analysis relevant to Sarah's topic.
Academic Value:
Very high. Peer-reviewed articles are central to academic writing and are essential for building
strong theoretical and empirical foundations.
Contribution to Literature Review:
Such articles offer original research, literature syntheses, and critical discussions on AI in
higher education, which are indispensable for Sarah’s study.
Example:
A journal article from Computers & Education exploring how AI-driven tools affect teaching
strategies would provide credible, citable evidence.
2. Government Report
✅ Priority: Medium to High – Use Selectively
Reliability & Authorship:
Produced by official government agencies (e.g., Department of Higher Education and
Training), often with expert consultation. These are reliable sources of statistical data and policy
insight.
Publication Process:
While not peer-reviewed, government publications go through internal validation and legal
checks, increasing their trustworthiness.
Academic Value:
Moderate to high, especially for policy-related discussions, contextual analysis, or data-driven
background.
Contribution to Literature Review:
Useful for contextualising the socio-political environment, legislation, funding patterns, and
the role of AI in national higher education strategies.
