HLS Assessment Brief
Module title &
code
7000BOP Learning, Training and Development
Module Leader Lisa Burman
Assessment
component (e.g.
CW, class test)
Coursework
Assessment
details and
instructions
The assessment for this module comprises of a training programme
report. The word count is 3500 words (+/- 10%) plus relevant
appendices and assess learning outcomes 1-3 above.
You will be required to submit your coursework via the Turnitin link
provided in Aula.
Details on
format for
submission
Your submissions should be presented in a formal script e.g. Arial, or
Times New Roman, size 11. Your writing must be 1.5. line spacing. there
should be a line space between each paragraph.
Heading and sub-headings should be in an emphasised font (bold or
underlined and larger size).
Margins should be at least 2cm, preferably ‘normal’ 2.54cm top,
bottom, left and right. Pages should be numbered.
Cover pages provided when requested, with your student identification
number but not your name.
Submission
deadline
21/11/2022
Grade release
date
Grades will be released 2 weeks after the deadline on Aula after your
submission date. The module leader will inform you if there are any
changes to this date.
Learning
outcomes
assessed
1. Evidence a critical understanding and application of training needs,
training design, training methods and training Assessment;
2. Evaluate and critically analyse factors which influence effective
training design and delivery;
HLS Assessment Brief
3. Evidence working within ethical guidelines with sensitivity and
integrity.
Marking Please find a marking rubric below for information on how your
submission will be graded.
3
ASSESSMENT MARKING GUIDELINES
Marking Rubric for Learning, Training and Development
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Understanding of
training needs and tasks
suitable for training
with critical analysis of
context (LO1 and LO2) –
10%
Detailed description of the
context for the training
programme with an
excellent critical analysis of
the training needs and why
they have arisen.
Clear and detailed outline of
the task/goal for training
suitable to meet the training
need.
Detailed description of
potential trainees with clear
sample demographics
presented.
At the higher end there
should be no omissions and
data may be presented to
support analysis.
Detailed description of
the context for the
training programme with
a good critical analysis of
the training needs and
why they have arisen.
Clear outline of the
task/goal for training
suitable to meet the
training need.
Detailed description of
potential trainees with
clear sample
demographics presented
although there may be
minor omissions.
Description of the context
for the training
programme is presented
with an acceptable critical
analysis of the training
needs and why they have
arisen.
Outline of the task/goal
for training suitable to
meet the training need
but may lack clarity.
Description of potential
trainees with sample
demographics presented
although there may be
omissions or a lack of
clarity.
Simple description of the
context for the training
programme is presented
with a limited critical
analysis of the training
needs and why they have
arisen.
Outline of the task/goal for
training but lacks clarity or
relevance to training need.
Description of potential
trainees is brief with
limited sample
demographics presented.
Description of context is very
limited or missing, and no
critical analysis presented.
Task or goal for training is
not presented or unsuitable
for the training need.
Description of potential
trainees is missing or very
limited.
HLS Assessment Brief
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Presentation of
hierarchical training
analysis and training
issues (LO1 and LO2) –
40%
Clear, logical, and fully
complete hierarchical task
analysis table presented as
outlined in brief with all
tasks and sub-tasks
described and redescribed
where necessary.
Appropriate use of stop
rule.
Input, Action and Feedback
correctly applied to all tasks
and subtasks.
Notes section outline clear
and detailed issues for
training. Conditions for task
completion are clearly
outlined.
Training issues table is
clearly cross-referenced to
HTA table and structure
completely follows the
template provided in brief.
Suitable and insightful
training methods presented
with strong use of literature
to justify use.
At the higher end there will
be no errors/omissions and
appendices may be used to
Clear, and logical
hierarchical task analysis
table presented as
outlined in brief with
main tasks and sub-tasks
described and
redescribed where
necessary. Use of stop
rule mostly applied
appropriately.
Input, Action and
Feedback correctly
applied to all or most
tasks and subtasks.
Notes section outline
issues training and
conditions for task
completion are mostly
clearly outlined.
Training issues table is
cross referenced to HTA
table and follows the
template outlined in the
brief. Suitable training
methods presented with
good use of literature to
justify use.
Appendices may have
been used to provide
Hierarchical task analysis
table presented as
outlined in brief but there
may be a lack of clarity or
omissions of main tasks
and sub-tasks. Use of
stop rule mostly applied
appropriately.
Input, Action and
Feedback applied to all or
most tasks and subtasks
but there may be some
errors in application.
Notes section has been
used to outline issues for
training or conditions for
task competition but
there may be some
omissions or errors.
There is some attempt to
cross referenced training
issues table to HTA table.
Structure of table follows
the template outlined in
the brief. Mostly suitable
training methods
presented with literature
presented to justify use.
Hierarchical task analysis
table presented but
structure may not follow
the template and there is a
lack of clarity or omissions
of main tasks and sub tasks. Use of stop rule may
not be applied
appropriately.
Errors in the application of
Input, Action, Feedback.
Notes section is brief
and/or lacks depth of
understanding of the
training issues or
conditions under which the
task is performed.
There is some attempt to
cross referenced training
issues table to HTA table
but may feel confused.
Structure of table follows
the template outlined in
the brief and training
methods are presented but
literature may only weakly
justify use.
No Hierarchical task analysis
table presented or structure
is confusing and lacks logical
flow.
Input, Action and Feedback
inappropriately applied or
not applied at all.
Notes section fails to identify
training issues or the
conditions under which the
task is to be performed.
No cross-reference between
HTA and training issues
table. No training methods
presented or are unsuitable.
Little or no use of literature
to justify methods.
HLS Assessment Brief
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
present flowcharts and
supporting information.
alternative presentation
of HTA.
Critical analysis of
training design with
reference to individual
learning needs and
application of
Assessment methods for
training programmes
(LO1, LO2 and LO3) –
40%
Clear and detailed
presentation of training
programme with detailed
training objectives.
Practicalities such as
scheduling and resourcing
are fully considered.
The methods used within
the training design are fully
justified through an
excellent critical
Text describing what
meets this scale for this
criterion.
Detailed presentation of
training programme with
training objectives.
Practicalities such as
scheduling and resourcing
are considered.
The methods used within
the training design are
Presentation of training
programme with training
objectives but there may
be a lack of clarity in
places. Practicalities such
as scheduling and
resourcing are mostly
considered but there may
be some omissions.
The methods used within
the training design are
Simple presentation of
training programme with
training objectives but
there is a lack of clarity in
places. Practicalities such
as scheduling and
resourcing are somewhat
considered but there are
major omissions.
There is some attempt to
justify methods used
Presentation of training
programme lacks detail or is
missing. No consideration of
the practicalities of the
training.
Little or no justification of
the methods used.
Little or no consideration of
the individual learning needs
of trainees.
HLS Assessment Brief
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
engagement with the
literature.
An excellent consideration
of individual learning needs
and participant
characteristics supported by
the literature.
Fully detailed description of
a valid Assessment method
which addresses both
process and outcomes with
an excellent consideration
of the stakeholder of the
Assessment. Evidence of how
Assessment methods will
address learning outcomes
is presented with an
excellent use of academic
and practical materials to
justify their use.
mostly justified through a
good critical engagement
with the literature.
A good consideration of
individual learning needs
and participant
characteristics mostly
supported by the
literature.
Detailed description of a
valid Assessment method
which addresses both
process and outcomes
with a good consideration
of the stakeholder of the
Assessment. Evidence of
how Assessment methods
will address learning
outcomes is presented
with a good use of
academic and/or practical
materials to justify their
use.
somewhat justified
through an acceptable
critical engagement with
the literature.
An acceptable
consideration of
individual learning needs
and participant
characteristics somewhat
supported by the
literature.
Description of Assessment
method is presented but
there may be omissions
in the Assessment of
process and outcomes.
An acceptable
consideration of the
stakeholder within the
Assessment. The
Assessment methods will
address learning
outcomes but there may
be a lack of clarity in
places. Use of academic
and/or practical materials
to justify methods is at an
acceptable level.
through an adequate
critical engagement with
the literature.
An adequate consideration
of individual learning
needs and participant
characteristics but this may
not always be supported
by the literature.
Simple description of
Assessment method is
presented but there are
omissions in the Assessment
of process and outcomes.
An adequate consideration
of the stakeholder of the
Assessment but there may
be some omissions. The
Assessment methods may
fail to adequately address
the learning objectives in
places. Use of academic
and/or practical materials
to justify methods is at an
adequate level.
Poor or no presentation of
the method of Assessment.
HLS Assessment Brief
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Completeness and
Evidence of being able
to work within ethical
guidelines with
sensitivity (LO3) – 10%
Ethical issues of training
design fully considered with
reference to appropriate
guidelines (BPS, ABP, CIPD
as an example).
Sensitive and inclusive
approach to all aspects of
the training cycle presented
within the report.
Excellent writing style and
all citations and references
in the appropriate style.
At the top higher the work
is of publishable quality.
Ethical issues of training
design largely considered
with reference to
appropriate guidelines
(BPS, ABP, CIPD as an
example).
Sensitive and inclusive
approach to all aspects of
the training cycle
presented within the
report.
Very good writing style
and all citations and
references in the
appropriate style with
only minor errors.
Ethical issues of training
design have been
considered with
reference to appropriate
guidelines (BPS, ABP,
CIPD as an example),
although there may some
omissions.
A mostly sensitive and
inclusive approach to
aspects of training cycle
presented within the
report.
Good writing style and all
citations and references
in the appropriate style
with only some errors.
Ethical issues of training
design have been
considered and there may
be reference to
appropriate guidelines
(BPS, ABP, CIPD as an
example), although there
may some omissions.
A mostly sensitive and
inclusive approach to
aspects of training cycle
presented within the
report.
Adequate writing style and
citations and references
broadly follow the
appropriate style but there
may be errors.
Ethical issues have not been
considered or
inappropriately applied. No
reference to appropriate
guidelines.
Lack of sensitivity and
inclusivity within the report.
Poor writing style and major
errors in referencing
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
MSc Business & Organisational Psychology
Module Code: 7000BOP
Learning, Training and Development
Assignment brief: Training programme
report
Academic Year: 2022- 2023
Module Leader: Lisa Burman
per138@coventry.ac.uk
1
Contents
Welcome and Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………2
Learning Outcomes………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2
Assignment instructions…………………………………………………………………………………………………..2
Coursework: Training programme report (3,500 words)…………………………………………………..2
Presentation of your submissions……………………………………………………………………………………..5
Specific Help Available and Further Helpance……………………………………………………………………5
Coursework Submission …………………………………………………………………………………………………..6
Academic Dishonesty ………………………………………………………………………………………………………6
Turnitin ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7
Good scholarly practice………………………………………………………………………………………………..7
Referencing…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8
2
Welcome and Introduction
Welcome to 7000BOP, Learning, Training and Development. You may already have
experienced learning, training and development in the workplace. This module aims to
promote and in-dept and applied understanding of these vital processes within organisations.
Seminars will be highly participative and with a focus on best practice and contemporary
theory.
Learning Outcomes
The intended learning outcomes are that on completion of this module the student should be
able to:
1. Evidence a critical understanding and application of training needs, training design, training
methods and training Assessment;
2. Evaluate and critically analyse factors which influence effective training design and delivery;
3. Evidence working within ethical guidelines with sensitivity and integrity.
Assignment instructions
The assessment in this module consists of one assignment:
Component % of module mark Learning outcomes
assessed
Submission Date
A training
programme report
(3,500 words) 100% 1, 2, and 3
21st November 2022
by 18.00
Going above or below the word counting by 10% or more will be considered when providing
feedback and grades. The reference list is not included in the word count.
Please note that this module is part of the course accredited by the Association for Business
Psychology ABP. To gain ABP accreditation your overall grades for the course must be above
50%.
Coursework: Training programme report (3,500 words)
The assessment for this module comprises of a training programme report. The word count is
3500 words (+/- 10%) plus relevant appendices and assess learning outcomes 1-3 above.
The deadline for submission is 21st November 2022 by 18.00.
3
You will be required to submit your coursework via the Turnitin link in Aula. Further details of
how to do this will be provided during the module.
Please note that you are only able to upload one document via Turnitin. Therefore, your
coursework must be collated into one document.
Please note that by submitting your coursework you are declaring that your coursework is
entirely your own work – if you are in any doubt regarding the correct referencing of sources or
what constitutes plagiarism or collusion, please consult your course handbook. If you still have
any queries or doubts regarding plagiarism or collusion please speak to the module leader or
your course director. Students found guilty of plagiarism or collusion face severe penalties, so
it is essential that you understand and follow standard procedures for referencing other
people’s work.
Instructions and Marking Scheme
The assessment outline (training report)
You are required to produce a training programme report based on the design of a training
programme. A word count for each section is shown to help you but this is only provided as a
guide and you may differ in where the words are spread across your own report. The overall
word count guide for the report is 3500 words.
INTRODUCTION (Guide 500 words)
You should identify a task that can be related to a training programme. This can be work related, for example the implementation of a new IT system for a financial team, or it can be
related to a task, such as helping students to cook a meal, or perhaps showing a group of elderly
people how to operate a microwave. What is important here is that those who will be carrying
out the task are clearly identified as this may have an effect on the design of the training
programme. You should set the scene clearly, so provide a description of the contextual basis
(work, home, school etc.) and give specific details of the sample (age, gender, levels of existing
knowledge for the task and any known abilities or difficulties). Please give the report a title and
provide a short summary.
TASK ANALYSIS (Guide 800 words)
This next section of the report should include a Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) of the task
identified in the introduction. You should systematically analyse the task using the HTA process.
The HTA process is described in the relevant lecture and associated materials. The HTA should
be presented as a table as shown in the lecture notes, you may also include the task level
diagram. Note, you will not be able to complete the whole analysis as this would take you too
long, so please stop at levels 2 or 3. The main aim of this process is to break down the tasks so
that you then identify how and where training needs to take place. You may have to select just
one or two areas of the task if it is a large one, for example, if teaching students to cook, you
may want to focus on utilising the equipment safely and cooking a very simple recipe (e.g. an
omelette). As a guide there should be no more than 3-4 pages for the table. With regards to
4
performance of this task, indicate whether there any standards required or conditions under
which it needs to be performed.
IDENTIFICATION OF TRAINING ISSUES (Guide 600 words)
In this section you should use your analysis to identify and record any issues associated with
training this task; this will be based on your HTA. You should cover: the types of training
methods or principles, give a brief explanation of the principle and use relevant literature and
cross reference back to your analysis. For example, you may have identified that older/younger
people may have difficulty using certain equipment, how will this be addressed through a
training method? You can use a table to record this information, a suggested format and
example is given below:
Issue
identified
in HTA
Cross
reference
to HTA
Type of
training
method or
principle
Explanation of
why method or
approach chosen
Relevant
citations
Any other
comments
Information
required
about
health and
safety
when using
a cooker.
Task 1:
using
oven
gloves to
remove
items
from the
oven.
Computer
based
learning
(e.g., e learning)
Presenting
materials online
so that individuals
can access the
information in
their own time.
Dolezalek,
(2004, cited
in Arnold,
2011).
E-learning is
a good way
to gain
knowledge
without the
direct aid of
face-to-face
teaching.
TRAINING PROGRAMME DESIGN (Guide 900 words)
This section should set out very clearly the training programme that you have devised for the
task and the training method selected. The training objectives both for the overall task and for
the separate parts should be provided. The order and content of the training programme should
be made clear. You should provide justification (using relevant literature) for the methods
chosen. You should address how you have considered different learning styles required by your
sample of learners. Give some consideration to the practicalities, scheduling and timescale of
the training programme too.
TRAINING Assessment (Guide 700 words)
5
This part of the report should detail how you will assess the learner’s progress through the task
and their attainment at the end. You should draw on academic and applied materials to show
your understanding of how training is effectively evaluated.
Specific help available
1. During the module students will receive information on how to complete the
hierarchical task analysis; a practice will be given as part of the lecture activities.
2. The reading lists provided in lectures will help in starting to find appropriate
material in preparation for the assignment.
3. On-line material to support this assignment can be found on Moodle.
Please note that if you are unable to submit coursework or attend an assessment (i.e. a test or
examination) you may be eligible to apply for an extension or a deferral. Please refer to the
Registry guidance for students at the following link:
https://share.coventry.ac.uk/students/Registry/Pages/Deferrals-and Extension.aspx
Presentation of your submissions
Your submissions should be presented in a formal script e.g. Arial, or Times New Roman, size
11. Your writing must be 1.5. line spacing. there should be a line space between each
paragraph.
Heading and sub-headings should be in an emphasised font (bold or underlined and larger
size).
Margins should be at least 2cm, preferably ‘normal’ 2.54cm top, bottom, left and right. Pages
should be numbered.
Cover pages provided when requested, with your 21student identification number but not
your name.
Reference List
Following the APA (7th edition) all citations should be double line spaced and have a hanging
indent in a Reference List.
A “hanging indent” means that each subsequent line after the first line of your citation should
be indented by 0.5 inches. You can find a sample here ld.php (up.edu)
Specific Help Available and Further Helpance
6
Please attend all the teaching sessions, these sessions are designed to extend and apply your
understanding of theory that you accessed on FutureLearn. Engagement with teaching
sessions, Future Learn and Aula will help you to complete the assignment successfully. If you do
need Helpance outside of these times, then you may contact the course team during their
office hours.
1. During the module students will receive information in lectures and seminars and
examples will be given as part of the lecture activities
2. The reading lists provided within lectures will provide help in starting to find
appropriate material in preparation for the assignment.
3. Online material will be available to support the assignment and can be found on
Aula.
Coursework Submission
The Submission Date for the coursework is 28th March 2022. An electronic copy ONLY is
required to be submitted via Aula Turnitin by 18:00hrs on the date indicated.
You have a 24hour ‘grace period’ in which to submit your assignment to account for any
technical difficulty you may encounter. If, however, you fail to submit within this grace period
(up to 18.00hrs) your submission will receive a grade of 0.
Please be aware that any submission that has been granted an extension (5 days) there is no 24
hour grace period.
The electronic version needs to be submitted through Turnitin to guarantee against plagiarism
and collusion. Please note, failure to submit your report through Turnitin will result in failure of
the coursework. Please note that if you are unable to submit coursework assessment you may
be eligible to apply for an extension or a deferral. Please refer to the Extenuating Circumstances
guidance for students at the following link: registry
IMPORTANT – You can submit copies of your coursework to a ‘similarity check link’ to check your
similarity scores – but please make sure your final submission is submitted to the ‘final’
submission link as this is the one that is marked.
Academic Dishonesty
Academic dishonesty covers any attempt by a student to gain an unfair advantage (e.g. extra
marks) for her/himself, or for another student, by unauthorised means. Examples of such
dishonesty include collusion, falsification, deceit, plagiarism and cheating in examinations.
It is strongly recommended that students refer to the University’s guidelines regarding
academic dishonesty, which are displayed on the module page of CU online. Any assessment
you submit must be your own work: plagiarism will be severely penalised.
The University takes very seriously any attempt to cheat in coursework or examinations by any
student and if a case is proven there are a range of penalties, which include expulsion from the
University.
7
You should refer to your student handbook for information on cheating, but generally speaking,
cheating includes acts of plagiarism (extracting information from other sources without
referencing the source), collusion (the unauthorised action of working with another student to
produce coursework) or taking unauthorised materials into an examination.
Turnitin
All coursework is submitted via Turnitin, which detects plagiarism and collusion by checking for
any unoriginal content by comparing submitted papers to several databases. It scans its own
databases here at the University, as well as other institutions. Turnitin also scans commercial
pages from books, newspapers, journals and the information publicly accessible on the Internet.
This means Turnitin will detect similarities between a student’s submission and:
· any previous submissions from the student (this can reveal potential acts of self plagiarism)
· submissions from other students for this cohort or previous cohorts (this can reveal
potential acts of collusion)
· most information available either through a hard copy or via the Internet (this can
reveal potential acts of plagiarism)
Any cases of suspected plagiarism or collusion are referred to an Academic Conduct Officer,
who will then investigate the case to see whether there is a case to answer to. If a case of
plagiarism or collusion is proven, there are a range of outcomes, from a warning to expulsion
from the University.
Collusion is straight-forward to avoid, by ensuring that you work independently to produce your
coursework. However, you should consider it a good academic practice to invite a fellow
student to provide any useful feedback on your written work.
Plagiarism can also easily be avoided because it is usually the result of poor scholarly practice.
If you engage appropriately with sources of information in the production of academic writing,
you should never have any concerns about the risk of plagiarism. Here are some good scholarly
practice tips to follow:
Good scholarly practice
• DO NOT COPY AND PASTE INFORMATION FROM ANOTHER SOURCE. Even if you do this with
the intention of adapting the information later, there is a risk that you may not do so
sufficiently. Instead
• MAKE NOTES ON WHAT YOU HAVE READ, and always note down the source of
information (title, author, page numbers, publisher name and location, date) so that
you can provide a correctly formatted citation and full reference later on.
• PARAPHRASE so that what you write is in your own words.
8
• PROVIDE A CITATION RIGHT NEXT TO THE INFORMATION YOU HAVE OBTAINED
FROM YOUR SOURCES. Good paraphrasing and injecting your own arguments result
in a combination of information from your sources and from you! Therefore, you
should insert a citation next to the information that is from your sources (even if it
is in the middle of a sentence) so that the reader can clearly distinguish between
what other authors have said (your sources) and what YOU are saying.
• USE DIRECT QUOTATIONS SPARINGLY. This should only be when there is no better
way of expressing the point/argument. Always use quotation marks (“) and cite the
source directly afterwards including the page number – e.g. (Smith and Jones 2015:
8).
• DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN PRIMARY SOURCES AND SECONDARY SOURCES. Always
ensure that you make it clear whether you have read the original source (primary)
or read about the information elsewhere (secondary) and cite the source
accordingly.
• FORMAT CITATIONS AND REFERENCES ACCORDING TO APA (7th edition), unless
instructed otherwise by the module leader.
If you have any concerns about plagiarism please speak to the module leader or the Centre for
Academic writing CAW
Referencing
Coventry University has adopted the APA format of referencing as the standard format for
citations and references. There is a Centre for Academic Writing (located next to the library,
also see the links here) which can provide detailed support on the APA System. As part of the
assessment, you are expected to reference using the APA style both in-text and for the
reference list – any deviation from this will be considered during marking. There is also a useful
reference guide on the APA Style that we advise you to download and keep. This can be found
here
9
ASSESSMENT MARKING GUIDELINES
Marking Rubric for Learning, Training and Development
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Understanding of
training needs and
tasks suitable for
training with critical
analysis of context
(LO1 and LO2) – 10%
Detailed description of the
context for the training
programme with an
excellent critical analysis of
the training needs and why
they have arisen.
Clear and detailed outline
of the task/goal for
training suitable to meet
the training need.
Detailed description of
potential trainees with
clear sample demographics
presented.
At the higher end there
should be no omissions
and data may be
presented to support
analysis.
Detailed description of
the context for the
training programme
with a good critical
analysis of the training
needs and why they
have arisen.
Clear outline of the
task/goal for training
suitable to meet the
training need.
Detailed description of
potential trainees with
clear sample
demographics presented
although there may be
minor omissions.
Description of the
context for the training
programme is presented
with an acceptable
critical analysis of the
training needs and why
they have arisen.
Outline of the task/goal
for training suitable to
meet the training need
but may lack clarity.
Description of potential
trainees with sample
demographics
presented although
there may be omissions
or a lack of clarity.
Simple description of the
context for the training
programme is presented
with a limited critical
analysis of the training
needs and why they have
arisen.
Outline of the task/goal
for training but lacks
clarity or relevance to
training need.
Description of potential
trainees is brief with
limited sample
demographics presented.
Description of context is
very limited or missing, and
no critical analysis
presented.
Task or goal for training is
not presented or unsuitable
for the training need.
Description of potential
trainees is missing or very
limited.
10
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Presentation of
hierarchical training
analysis and training
issues (LO1 and LO2) –
40%
Clear, logical, and fully
complete hierarchical task
analysis table presented as
outlined in brief with all
tasks and sub-tasks
described and redescribed
where necessary.
Appropriate use of stop
rule.
Input, Action and Feedback
correctly applied to all
tasks and subtasks.
Notes section outline clear
and detailed issues for
training. Conditions for
task completion are clearly
outlined.
Training issues table is
clearly cross-referenced to
HTA table and structure
completely follows the
template provided in brief.
Suitable and insightful
training methods
presented with strong use
of literature to justify use.
At the higher end there
will be no errors/omissions
and appendices may be
used to present flowcharts
and supporting
information.
Clear, and logical
hierarchical task analysis
table presented as
outlined in brief with
main tasks and sub-tasks
described and
redescribed where
necessary. Use of stop
rule mostly applied
appropriately.
Input, Action and
Feedback correctly
applied to all or most
tasks and subtasks.
Notes section outline
issues training and
conditions for task
completion are mostly
clearly outlined.
Training issues table is
cross referenced to HTA
table and follows the
template outlined in the
brief. Suitable training
methods presented with
good use of literature to
justify use.
Appendices may have
been used to provide
alternative presentation
of HTA.
Hierarchical task
analysis table presented
as outlined in brief but
there may be a lack of
clarity or omissions of
main tasks and sub tasks. Use of stop rule
mostly applied
appropriately.
Input, Action and
Feedback applied to all
or most tasks and
subtasks but there may
be some errors in
application.
Notes section has been
used to outline issues
for training or
conditions for task
competition but there
may be some omissions
or errors.
There is some attempt
to cross referenced
training issues table to
HTA table. Structure of
table follows the
template outlined in the
brief. Mostly suitable
training methods
presented with
literature presented to
justify use.
Hierarchical task analysis
table presented but
structure may not follow
the template and there is
a lack of clarity or
omissions of main tasks
and sub-tasks. Use of stop
rule may not be applied
appropriately.
Errors in the application
of Input, Action,
Feedback.
Notes section is brief
and/or lacks depth of
understanding of the
training issues or
conditions under which
the task is performed.
There is some attempt to
cross referenced training
issues table to HTA table
but may feel confused.
Structure of table follows
the template outlined in
the brief and training
methods are presented
but literature may only
weakly justify use.
No Hierarchical task
analysis table presented or
structure is confusing and
lacks logical flow.
Input, Action and Feedback
inappropriately applied or
not applied at all.
Notes section fails to
identify training issues or
the conditions under which
the task is to be performed.
No cross-reference
between HTA and training
issues table. No training
methods presented or are
unsuitable. Little or no use
of literature to justify
methods.
11
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
Critical analysis of
training design with
reference to individual
learning needs and
application of
Assessment methods
for training
programmes (LO1, LO2
and LO3) – 40%
Clear and detailed
presentation of training
programme with detailed
training objectives.
Practicalities such as
scheduling and resourcing
are fully considered.
The methods used within
the training design are
fully justified through an
excellent critical
engagement with the
literature.
An excellent consideration
of individual learning
needs and participant
characteristics supported
by the literature.
Fully detailed description
of a valid Assessment
method which addresses
both process and
outcomes with an
excellent consideration of
the stakeholder of the
Assessment. Evidence of
how Assessment methods
will address learning
outcomes is presented
with an excellent use of
academic and practical
materials to justify their
use.
Text describing what
meets this scale for this
criterion.
Detailed presentation of
training programme
with training objectives.
Practicalities such as
scheduling and
resourcing are
considered.
The methods used
within the training
design are mostly
justified through a good
critical engagement with
the literature.
A good consideration of
individual learning needs
and participant
characteristics mostly
supported by the
literature.
Detailed description of a
valid Assessment method
which addresses both
process and outcomes
with a good
consideration of the
stakeholder of the
Assessment. Evidence of
how Assessment methods
will address learning
outcomes is presented
with a good use of
Presentation of training
programme with
training objectives but
there may be a lack of
clarity in places.
Practicalities such as
scheduling and
resourcing are mostly
considered but there
may be some omissions.
The methods used
within the training
design are somewhat
justified through an
acceptable critical
engagement with the
literature.
An acceptable
consideration of
individual learning
needs and participant
characteristics
somewhat supported by
the literature.
Description of
Assessment method is
presented but there
may be omissions in the
Assessment of process
and outcomes. An
acceptable
consideration of the
stakeholder within the
Assessment. The
Simple presentation of
training programme with
training objectives but
there is a lack of clarity in
places. Practicalities such
as scheduling and
resourcing are somewhat
considered but there are
major omissions.
There is some attempt to
justify methods used
through an adequate
critical engagement with
the literature.
An adequate
consideration of
individual learning needs
and participant
characteristics but this
may not always be
supported by the
literature.
Simple description of
Assessment method is
presented but there are
omissions in the
Assessment of process and
outcomes. An adequate
consideration of the
stakeholder of the
Assessment but there may
be some omissions. The
Assessment methods may
fail to adequately address
Presentation of training
programme lacks detail or
is missing. No consideration
of the practicalities of the
training.
Little or no justification of
the methods used.
Little or no consideration of
the individual learning
needs of trainees.
Poor or no presentation of
the method of Assessment.
12
Criterion >70 60-69 50-59 40-49 <39
academic and/or
practical materials to
justify their use.
Assessment methods will
address learning
outcomes but there may
be a lack of clarity in
places. Use of academic
and/or practical
materials to justify
methods is at an
acceptable level.
the learning objectives in
places. Use of academic
and/or practical materials
to justify methods is at an
adequate level.
Completeness and
Evidence of being able
to work within ethical
guidelines with
sensitivity (LO3) – 10%
Ethical issues of training
design fully considered
with reference to
appropriate guidelines
(BPS, ABP, CIPD as an
example).
Sensitive and inclusive
approach to all aspects of
the training cycle
presented within the
report.
Excellent writing style and
all citations and references
in the appropriate style.
At the top higher the work
is of publishable quality.
Ethical issues of training
design largely
considered with
reference to appropriate
guidelines (BPS, ABP,
CIPD as an example).
Sensitive and inclusive
approach to all aspects
of the training cycle
presented within the
report.
Very good writing style
and all citations and
references in the
appropriate style with
only minor errors.
Ethical issues of training
design have been
considered with
reference to
appropriate guidelines
(BPS, ABP, CIPD as an
example), although
there may some
omissions.
A mostly sensitive and
inclusive approach to
aspects of training cycle
presented within the
report.
Good writing style and
all citations and
references in the
appropriate style with
only some errors.
Ethical issues of training
design have been
considered and there may
be reference to
appropriate guidelines
(BPS, ABP, CIPD as an
example), although there
may some omissions.
A mostly sensitive and
inclusive approach to
aspects of training cycle
presented within the
report.
Adequate writing style
and citations and
references broadly follow
the appropriate style but
there may be errors.
Ethical issues have not been
considered or
inappropriately applied. No
reference to appropriate
guidelines.
Lack of sensitivity and
inclusivity within the
report.
Poor writing style and
major errors in referencing
