Developing research-based solutions for practice

Two constraints shape this report and both come from the scenario rather than the formatting. The first is that the problem is already fixed: it is the professional practice problem you identified in the previous assignment, so this paper continues rather than restarts, and restating it at length wastes a page out of three. The second is the audience. Your supervisor will read the report and you will then present to the whole staff and lead a strategy discussion about implementing what you found. That means the deliverable is not a literature review; it is a report that arrives at solutions someone could act on, and its evidence sections exist to justify those solutions. Write toward the recommendation from the first paragraph, and let the length budget follow from it: a paragraph re-establishing the problem, the bulk on evidence and synthesis, and a substantial close on what should be done.

The eight additional peer-reviewed articles are the substance, and the instruction says to use this additional content to answer your research problem — which is a synthesis instruction, not a summary one. Group the articles by what they say rather than reviewing them one by one: where they agree, where they conflict, where the evidence is thin, and what that collectively implies for your setting. Where studies disagree, say which you find more credible and why, because a report that presents conflicting evidence without adjudicating it leaves the decision entirely with the reader. Note also that the submission requirements ask for at least ten peer-reviewed references overall while the body asks for eight more, so the count includes what you already had; check the total before submitting. Use the Developing Research-Based Solutions Template and read the scoring guide before drafting, since both are named in the brief and both define what is actually being marked.