BSc Business Management dissertation.
Literature Review and Research Methodology chapters, each 3,000 words maximum. Literature Review should be finished first. Research Methodology will be finished by 20/05.
The Module Guides and my Research Portfolio submitted to the University of Bolton are attached for your reference.
There are tutors supplemental guidelines to be shared with you.
BSc (Hons) Business Management (DAD)
Cohort 8
BMP 6025
Dissertation
MODULE GUIDE
2021/2022
Trimester 2
Level HE6
Contents
1. Module Overview 2
2. Learning and Teaching 2
3. Graduate Attributes 2
4. Module Communications 3
5. Module Description 3
6. Learning Outcomes and Assessments 3
6. Assessment Deadlines 3
8. Assessment Feedback 4
9. Module Calendar 4
10. Formative Assessment 5
11. Indicative Reading 5
12. Guidelines for the Preparation and Submission of Written Assessments 5
13. Procedures for Other Assessments 7
14. Academic Misconduct 7
15. Assessments 8
Assignment Task 1 – Portfolio (10% of Total Marks) – 2000 words 8
Assignment Task 2 – Dissertation (70% of Total Marks) – 10,000 words 10
Assignment Task 3 – Reflection (20% of Total Marks) 13
16. General Assessment Guidelines for Written Assessments Level HE6 0
1. Module Overview
Module Tutor Asma Begum
Email a.begum@bolton.ac.uk
Availability and contact method(s) Wednesday 10am – 12pm UK time
Weblink to Moodle Class https://moodle.bolton.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=21285
Weblink to Module Specification Modules.bolton.ac.uk/bmp6025
2. Learning and Teaching
This module is delivered over 15 weeks using a synchronised online learning approach with scheduled online sessions.
Most sessions comprise a lecture with workshop activities. If you are unable to attend a session due to factors outside your control, you are expected to inform your tutor and engage in the activities set before the next scheduled session. You will also be expected to watch the recording of the session before the next class.
In weeks 2, 4, & 12 tutorials will take place which will provide you with the opportunity to discuss your progress on the module and receive feedback on assessments. This may be one to one or a group as arranged.
To complete the module successfully you must allocate a substantial amount of independent study time, which will include undertaking set activities and carrying out assessment activities.
3. Graduate Attributes
Graduate attributes are the personal qualities and skills which the University of Bolton community values, and which a student is expected develop during their time at the University. Graduate attributes act as a point of reference for a student’s personal development and support the articulation of employability and transferable skills.
In total there are 10 graduate attributes (GAME). This module seeks to support the development towards self-awareness, resilience, problem solving, effective communication, global citizenship (includes sustainability), enterprise, adaptability, collaboration, confidence, life-long learning
4. Module Communications
The Module Tutor’s contact details are provided at the top of this page. You must check your University of Bolton email address and the Moodle area dedicated to this module regularly as many module communications are channelled through these media.
Your Module Tutor will normally aim to respond to your email messages within 2 full working days of receipt. However, responses will be longer in holiday periods.
The WhatsApp groups are only to be used for short queries and you should not expect an instant response taking into account the time zones and work rotations of staff members.
5. Module Description
This dissertation module is designed to give you the opportunity to pursue a piece of individual research under the supervision of a tutor. The research focus must be relevant to business management, and if you have opted to follow a specific pathway, relevant to that pathway. The work should be academically rigorous, unique and address a specific question or issue. You will need to evaluate theories, principles, concepts, and models relating to contemporary business and management practices. The work will also require you to undertake primary research and demonstrate familiarity with a range of research methodologies. Throughout the process you are required to critically appraise your skills development. Taught (T), Developed (D) and Assessed (A).
Taught (T), Developed (D) and Assessed (A).
6. Learning Outcomes and Assessments
Learning Outcomes Assessment
LO1: Identify an appropriate research topic and formulate appropriate objectives Coursework
Portfolio &
Dissertation
LO2: Develop an effective research strategy in which ethical considerations are critically appraised Coursework
Portfolio
LO3: Produce a critical literature review and research methodology Coursework
Dissertation
LO4: Undertake primary research and critically appraise the results Coursework
Dissertation
LO5: Synthesise research findings and make informed judgements in the light of these Coursework
Dissertation
LO6: Critically reflect on your skills and abilities as a researcher Practical
Presentation
6. Assessment Deadlines
Learning Outcomes Due Date Weight
Research portfolio including proposal, research strategy and ethics form 04.04.2022 10%
Dissertation (10,000 Words) 08.08.2022 70%
Reflection 14.08.2022 20%
8. Assessment Feedback
Feedback on items of assessment can be formal (such as on a signed feedback form) or informal (such as advice from a tutor in a tutorial). Feedback is therefore not just your grade or the comments written on your feedback form, it is advice you get from your tutor and sometimes your peers about how your work is progressing, how well you have done, what further actions you might take.
We recognise the value of prompt feedback on work submitted. Other than in exceptional circumstances (such as might be caused by staff illness), you can expect your work to be marked and feedback provided not more than 15 working days from the deadline date. However, please note that that such feedback will be provisional and unconfirmed until the Assessment Board has met and may therefore be subject to change.
Please take time to read or listen to your assessment feedback. This can be very useful in determining your strengths and key areas for development and can therefore help you improve on future grades.
9. Module Calendar
Session No. Date or Week Commencing Topics Covered Planned Delivery Method
1 24-01-2022 Introduction to the Module, VLE and Assessments Online
2 31-01-2022 Examining a research problem and identifying research topics Online
3 07-02-2022 Determining research questions and developing research objectives Online
4 14-02-2022 Seminar / Tutorial / One-to-feedback / Consultations (1) Online
5 21-02-2022 Research Project Management – Planning, Management and Progress Assessment Online
6 28-02-2022 Developing a critical literature review (1) Online
7 07-03-2022 Developing a critical literature review (2) Online
8 14-03-2022 Conceptual Frameworks Online
9 21-03-2022 Seminar / Tutorial / One-to-feedback / Consultations (2) Online
10 28-03-2022 Ethical considerations and approval- Review progress meeting with supervisor Online
11 04-04-2022 Assign 1 (chapter 1) deadline Introduction to research methods and design Online
12 11-04-2022 Research Philosophies, Strategies and Approaches Online
13 18-04-2022 Chapter 2 submission
Primary data collection strategy – including practical considerations and timing Online
14 23-05-2022 Seminar / Tutorial / One-to-feedback / Consultations (3) Online
15 30-05-2022 Chapter 3 – Research Methodology Online
3 06-06-2022 Secondary data collection Online
4 13-06-2022 Designing Data Collection Instrument (s) Online
5 20-06-2022 Questionnaire approval Online
6 27-06-2022 Data collection period Online
7 04-07-2022 Data collection period Online
8 11-07-2022 Data collection period- consultation(4) Online
9 18-07-2022 Consultation (5) Online
10 25-07-2022 Review progress meeting with supervisor Online
11 01-08-2022 Writing up dissertation Online
12 08-08-2022 Final dissertation submission (10,000words)
13 14-08-2022 Presentation
10. Formative Assessment
Formative assessment is employed to support your learning on the module, allowing you to reflect on feedback on your progress from your tutors and peers. It takes a variety of forms including online class activities and does not contribute to the final module mark.
11. Indicative Reading
Bell, J. (2014) Doing Your Research Project: a guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 6th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Open University Press.
Collis, J. & Hussey, R. (2014) Business Research, A Practical Guide for Undergraduate & Postgraduate Students, 4th ed. London: Palgrave MacMillan
Gill, J. & Johnson, P. (2011) Research Methods for Managers, 4th ed. London: Sage.
Saunders,M., Lewis, P.& Thornhill, A. (2012) Research Methods for Business Students, 6th ed. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Wilson,J. (2013) Essentials of Business Research: a guide to doing your research project. 2nd Edition London: Sage
12. Guidelines for the Preparation and Submission of Written Assessments
1. Written assessments should be word-processed in Arial or Calibri Light font size 12. There should be double-spacing and each page should be numbered.
2. There should be a title page identifying the programme name, module title, assessment title, your student number, your marking tutor and the date of submission.
3. You should include a word-count at the end of the assessment (excluding references, figures, tables and appendices).
Where a word limit is specified, the following penalty systems applies:
• Up to 10% over the specified word length = no penalty
• 10 – 20% over the specified indicative word length = 5 marks subtracted (but if the assessment would normally gain a pass mark, then the final mark to be no lower than the pass mark for the assessment).
• More than 20% over the indicative word length = if the assessment would normally gain a pass mark or more, then the final mark will capped at the pass mark for the assessment.
4. All written work should be referenced using the standard University of Bolton referencing style– see: https://libguides.bolton.ac.uk/resources/referencing/
5. Unless otherwise notified by your Module Tutor, electronic copies of assignments should be saved as word documents and uploaded into Turnitin via the Moodle class area. If you experience problems in uploading your work, then you must send an electronic copy of your assessment to your Module Tutor via email BEFORE the due date/time.
6. Please note that when you submit your work to Moodle, it will automatically be checked for matches against other electronic information. The individual percentage text matches may be used as evidence in an academic misconduct investigation (see Section 14).
7. Late work will be subject to the penalties:
• Up to 7 calendar days late = 10 marks subtracted but if the assignment would normally gain a pass mark, then the final mark to be no lower than the pass mark for the assignment.
• More than 7 calendar days late = This will be counted as non-submission and no marks will be recorded.
Late submission of assessments on refer and those which are graded Pass/Fail only, is not permitted. Students may request an extension to the original published deadline date as described below.
8. In the case of exceptional and unforeseen circumstances, an extension of up to 14 days after the assessment deadline may be granted. This must be agreed by your Programme Leader, following a discussion the Module Tutor. You should complete an Extension Request Form available from your Tutor and attach documentary evidence of your circumstances, prior to the published submission deadline.
Extensions over 14 calendar days should be requested using the Mitigating Circumstances procedure, with the exception of extensions for individual projects and artefacts which, at the discretion of the Programme Leader, may be longer than 14 days.
Requests for extensions which take a submission date past the end of the module (normally week 15) must be made using the Mitigating Circumstances procedures.
Some students with registered disabilities will be eligible for revised submission deadlines. Revised submission deadlines do not require the completion extension request paperwork.
Please note that the failure of data storage systems is not considered to be a valid reason for an extension. It is therefore important that you keep multiple copies of your work on different storage devices before submitting it.
13. Procedures for Other Assessments
Please see the assignment brief for all assessment procedures. Presentation schedules (or dates for Viva Voce) will be confirmed in class however the submission deadline date is indicated on the assessment deadline.
14. Academic Misconduct
Academic misconduct may be defined as any attempt by a student to gain an unfair advantage in any assessment. This includes plagiarism, collusion, commissioning (contract cheating) amongst other offences. In order to avoid these types of academic misconduct, you should ensure that all your work is your own and that sources are attributed using the correct referencing techniques. You can also check originality through Turnitin.
Please note that penalties apply if academic misconduct is proven. See the following link for further details: https://www.bolton.ac.uk/student-policy-zone/student-policy-zone-2021-2022
15. Assessments
Assessment Number 1
Assessment Type (and weighting) Portfolio (10%) – 2000 words
Assessment Name Research portfolio including proposal, research strategy and ethics form
Assessment Submission Date 04/04/2022
Learning Outcomes Assessed:
LO1: Identify an appropriate research topic and formulate appropriate objectives
LO2: Develop an effective research strategy in which ethical considerations are critically appraised
Assessment Brief
Assignment Task 1 – Portfolio (10% of Total Marks) – 2000 words
This written assignment requires to develop a Research Portfolio of 2000 words in which you develop a Research Proposal by identifying an appropriate research topic, formulating research questions and objectives (should be approved by the supervisor). The research topic should be of sufficient interest to you to ultimately be the basis for your dissertation project. Explain and rationalize the problem or issue selected. You should demonstrate your research skills by critically analysing journal articles and designing of a suitable research strategy along with the consideration of ethical issues. Ethics form should be approved by the supervisor prior to research commencement. Evidence of approval is required.
Secondary Research Level HE6 – It is expected that the Reference List will contain between fifteen to twenty sources. As a MINIMUM the Reference List should include three refereed academic journals and five academic books.
2020-21 HE6 Students
Written Assignment Feedback Form
Programme: Academic Area/Partner Centre:
Student Number: Year/Semester/Cohort:
Module Code/Occ./Title:
Assignment Number/Title:
Marking Tutor: Deadline: Date Submitted: Weight:
Relevant Learning Outcomes (Please see Module Specification): Achieved? Y/N
Feedback:
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Needs some development Needs much more development
Relevance (to the title/brief Learning Outcomes)
Knowledge/Understanding (cognitive awareness of the subject area)
Argument/ Analysis (appropriate to the level)
Structure (planning and flow)
Presentation (format/layout, use of tables, figures & Appendices)
Written English (style, clarity, spelling & grammar)
Research (quality & range of research sources employed)
Referencing (in the text, in the Bibliography/Reference List)
Comments Areas for Further Development
1st Marker’s Grade Moderated Grade Turn-it-in checked
Please note that the mark advised to you on this feedback form is subject to ratification by the Assessment Board.
Signed (Module Tutor): Date:
Assessment Number 2
Assessment Type (and weighting) Coursework (70%) – 10,000 words
Assessment Name Literature Review Research Methodology Final Dissertation
Assessment Submission Date 18.04.2022 30.05.2022 08.08.2022
Learning Outcomes Assessed:
LO1: Identify an appropriate research topic and formulate appropriate objectives
LO3: Produce a critical literature review and research methodology
LO4: Undertake primary research and critically appraise the results
LO5: Synthesise research findings and make informed judgements in the light of these
Assessment Brief
Assignment Task 2 – Dissertation (70% of Total Marks) – 10,000 words
The second assessment is 10,000 words dissertation covering a relevant business management topic based on your Research Portfolio in Task 1. The Dissertation should be structured in chapters covering Introduction, Literature Review, Research Methodology, Analysis of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations. The word count is exclusive of Abstract, Table of Contents / Figures, References and Appendices.
Two chapter from Dissertation will be completed in Semester 1. These include Chapter 2: Critical Analysis of Literature Review and Chapter 3: Research Methodology. Chapter 1, 4, 5 and 6 for full dissertation write-up will be developed in Semester 2.
Secondary Research Level HE6 – It is expected that the Reference List will contain between fifteen to twenty sources. As a MINIMUM the Reference List should include three refereed academic journals and five academic books.
Specific Assessment Criteria:
(Please note that the General Assessment Criteria will also apply. Please see section 15)
Excellent (70% and above):
Introduction to research Context is exceptionally clear and concise. Clear statement of problem and associated objectives. Persuasive and comprehensive rationale. Task demanding. There is evidence of extensive in-depth additional research using Primary data. An excellent range of authoritative secondary data sources has been researched and used. Referencing is clear, relevant and consistently accurate with extensive range of resources. Review of literature is critical, and relevant to study. Comprehensive knowledge. Conceptual framework underpins study. The Research methodology shows evidence of extensive in-depth research with clear research design. Research methods are evaluated and selection is justified with reasoning. All the chapters are effectively constructed and demonstrate excellent coherence and cross-referencing. There is clarity of expression, with consistently accurate use of grammar and spelling, with fluent professional/academic writing.
Very Good (60-69%):
Introduction to research Context is clear and concise. Subject valid and relevant. Appropriate rationale. Chapters are clear and explicit. Scope for study is appropriate. Focus maintained on issue. Evidence of additional research shown. Correctly referenced where necessary. The background to the project is described but one or two areas could be more detailed. The research question(s) are clear and achievable. Evidence of additional research evident. Sound knowledge of topic. Some critical review. Conceptual framework underpins study. Clear review including majority of academic journal references. There is significant evidence of originality and creativity as appropriate. A wide range of authoritative secondary data sources has been researched and used. Research methodology is clearly defined with justification of selection. Sources are accurately cited and an appropriate reference list/bibliography in the correct style if provided. The work is generally clearly presented, with good grammar and spelling.
Good (50-59%):
Introduction to research Context is clear. Subject is valid and relevant. Some shortcomings in clarity of purpose and associated objectives. Task definition could improve but clear & explicit. Some additional research shown and sources are referenced. A simple description of the background to the project is provided. Research question(s) is stated but lacks depth. Satisfactory knowledge. Gaps and omissions in literature review. Some attempt at critical comment. Conceptual framework may be incomplete or inappropriate. The chapters are reasonably structured. There are relatively minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing.
Satisfactory (40-49%)
Introduction to research Context is marginally acceptable. Research questions and objectives lack clarity and focus. An attempt has been made to conduct additional research through primary data collection; the instrument / methods are however ineffective. Literature reviewed is largely descriptive and lack critical discussion. Insufficient reading and research demonstrated. Chapter are ineffectively structure and lack coherence. Some omissions are evident in the deployment of the relevant information/skills. There is evidence of a limited integration of theory, practice and information in relation to management skills and a limited evidence of originality and creativity. The candidate provides very limited referencing including some inconsistencies and inaccuracies.
Fail (39% and below):
Introduction to research Context is under developed, unclear or absent. Research question is unclear, unfeasible or absent. Communication and presentation – often poor or ambiguous, leading to meaning being barely apparent. Language, grammar and spelling poor. Research philosophy is not understood/not related to objectives. Other relevant considerations are omitted or superficial. Deficiencies or omissions in information, skills, and theoretical, conceptual, analytical, creative or practical elements relating to effective team working are found. There is poor integration of these in relation to the question set. There is little or no evidence of originality and creativity as appropriate.
2021-22 HE6 Students
Written Assignment Feedback Form
Programme: Academic Area/Partner Centre:
Student Number: Year/Semester/Cohort:
Module Code/Occ./Title:
Assignment Number/Title:
Marking Tutor: Deadline: Date Submitted: Weight:
Relevant Learning Outcomes (Please see Module Specification): Achieved? Y/N
Feedback:
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Needs some development Needs much more development
Relevance (to the title/brief Learning Outcomes)
Knowledge/Understanding (cognitive awareness of the subject area)
Argument/ Analysis (appropriate to the level)
Structure (planning and flow)
Presentation (format/layout, use of tables, figures & Appendices)
Written English (style, clarity, spelling & grammar)
Research (quality & range of research sources employed)
Referencing (in the text, in the Bibliography/Reference List)
Comments Areas for Further Development
1st Marker’s Grade Moderated Grade Turn-it-in checked
Please note that the mark advised to you on this feedback form is subject to ratification by the Assessment Board.
Signed (Module Tutor): Date:
Assessment Number 3
Assessment Type (and weighting) Practical (20%)
Assessment Name Reflective Viva and Presentation
Assessment Submission Date 14.08.2022
Learning Outcomes Assessed:
LO6: Critically reflect on your skills and abilities as a researcher
Assessment Brief
Assignment Task 3 – Reflection (20% of Total Marks)
The third assessment is a viva – in which you critically appraise your academic, professional and personal skills and goals. You expected to critically reflect on your development throughout your research indicating what lessons have been learnt. You should reflect upon what problems were encountered during the course of the project, and how these were overcome, as well as providing a brief discussion of what aspects of the work you found the most interesting and/or challenging.
You are required to include a 15 Minutes PowerPoint Presentation to support your verbal presentation and showcase your findings and conclusions.
Guidance:
Include highlights of each chapter – then reflect on the following points for each chapter:
• What happened during development of this particular research chapter that was unexpected? (any challenges?)
• What did you do to react to unexpected changes?
• What impact did this have on your research?
• What did you learn about yourself? (Your strengths and weaknesses)
You should then summarise in your presentation that as a result of the learning above,
• What are you going to change about yourself?
• How will you apply what you have learnt to work?
• What areas of research would you like to investigate next?
• How has this experienced shaped your future (learning/work/personal)?
You are not expected to include references for your viva presentation.
Specific Assessment Criteria:
(Please note that the General Assessment Criteria will also apply. Please see section 15)
Excellent (70% and above):
The presentation provides an excellent set of very well-designed slides, with excellent content, indicating reflection and thorough critical analysis of own development. Logical reflection has been made on problems encountered and how the researcher overcame each of them in a cohesive manner across the timeline. References have been made to each instance and respective elements of chapters. Lessons learnt have been well articulated with identified strengths and areas of development. An action plan or future recommendations have been outlined.
Very Good (60-69%):
The presentation provides a very good set of well-designed slides, with good content, indicating reflection and fair critical analysis of own development. Reflection has been made on problems encountered and how the researcher overcame each of them in a cohesive manner. References have been made to respective elements of chapters. Lessons learnt have been fairly articulated with identified strengths and areas of development.
Good (50-59%):
The presentation provides a fair set of reasonable slides, with acceptable content, indicating reflection and some critical analysis of own development. Reflection has been made on problems encountered; clarity required to demonstrate how researcher overcame them. References have been made to respective chapters at some point. Lessons learnt have been indicated. Lack explicit discussion of strength and areas that require further improvement
Satisfactory (40-49%)
The presentation provides a marginally acceptable set of slides, with some content, indicating reflection of own development. The reflection lack critical analysis. Problems encountered during the research have not been clearly outlined. Lacks references to specific instances. Reflection is largely generic. Lessons learnt have not been indicated. Lack discussion of strength and areas that require further improvement
Fail (39% and below):
The presentation provides a very weak set of slides with irrelevant content. The researcher has failed to reflect on his development and / or problems encountered during the research. The assessment criterion is not met and does not qualify for a pass.
2020-21 HE6 Students
Practical / Presentation Feedback Form
Programme: Academic Area/Partner Centre:
Student Number: Year/Semester/Cohort:
Module Code/Occ./Title:
Assignment Number/Title:
Marking Tutor: Deadline: Date Submitted: Weight:
Relevant Learning Outcomes (Please see Module Specification): Achieved? Y/N
Feedback:
Excellent Good Satisfactory Needs some development Needs much more development
Presentation Resources (slides/handouts)
INTRODUCTION
Preview of presentation
STRUCTURE
Clear progression of ideas
CONTENT
Critical Reflection
Research evidence
Referencing
Personal Ability
Structure and planning
Clarity of information
Visual aids
Individual presentation style
Team work/cohesion
Timing and length
Comments Areas for Further Development
1st Marker’s Grade Moderated Grade Turn-it-in checked
Please note that the mark advised to you on this feedback form is subject to ratification by the Assessment Board.
Signed (Module Tutor): Date:
16. General Assessment Guidelines for Written Assessments Level HE6
% Relevance Knowledge Argument/Analysis Structure Presentation Written English Research/Referencing
Class I
(Exceptional
Quality) 85-100%
Directly relevant to title. Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge/understanding of theory and practice for this level. Demonstrates the ability to expertly identify and critically appraise the most important issues, themes and questions. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding. Makes exceptional use of appropriate arguments and/or theoretical models.
Presents an exceptional critical Assessment of the material results in clear, logical and insightful conclusions. Demonstrates distinctive or independent thinking. Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. The presentational style & layout is correct for the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP). An exceptionally well written answer with standard spelling and grammar.
Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text.
An extensive range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style.
Class I
(Excellent
Quality) 70-84%
Directly relevant to title. Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Demonstrates an excellent knowledge/understanding of theory and practice for this level.
Demonstrates the ability to identify and critically appraise the most important issues, themes and questions. Makes creative use of appropriate arguments and/or theoretical models. Demonstrates some distinctive or independent thinking.
Presents an excellent critical Assessment of the material results in clear, logical and illuminating conclusions. Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. The presentational style & layout is correct for the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP). An excellently written
answer with standard spelling and grammar.
Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text.
A wide range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style.
Class II/i
(Very Good Quality) 60-69% Directly relevant to title. Addresses most of the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief. Demonstrates a very good knowledge/understanding of theory and practice for this level. Demonstrates the ability to identify and critically appraise key issues, themes and questions. Uses sound arguments or theoretical models. Presents a sound critical Assessment of the material resulting in clear and logical conclusions. Logically constructed in the main.
An appropriate format is used. The presentational style & layout is correct for the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of FTP. A very well written answer with standard spelling and grammar. Style is clear and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text and a wide range of appropriate references cited in reference list in the correct style.
Class II/ii
(Good Quality)
50-59% Generally addresses the title/brief, but sometimes considers irrelevant issues. Demonstrates a good knowledge/understanding of theory and practice for this level through the identification and critical appraisal of some key issues, themes and questions. Presents largely coherent arguments. Evidence of attempted analysis and critical Assessment, with some descriptive or narrative passages. Conclusions are fairly clear and logical. For the most part coherently articulated and logically structured. An acceptable format is used. The presentational style & layout is correct for the type of assignment. Inclusion of FTP but lacks selectivity. Competently written with minor lapses in spelling and grammar. Style is readable and academic in the main.
Most sources accurately cited in the text and an appropriate reference list is provided which is largely in the correct style.
Class III
(Satisfactory Quality) 40-49% Some degree of irrelevance to the title/brief.
Superficial consideration of the issues. Demonstrates an adequate knowledge/understanding of theory and practice for this level. An attempt is made to critically appraise some key issues, themes and questions. Presents basic arguments, but focus and consistency lacking in places. Issues are vaguely stated.
Descriptive or narrative passages evident which lack clear purpose. Conclusions are not always clear or logical. Adequate attempt at articulation and logical structure.
An acceptable format is used. The presentational style & layout is largely correct for the type of assignment.
Inappropriate use of FTP or not used where clearly needed to aid understanding. Generally competently written although intermittent lapses in grammar and spelling pose obstacles for the reader. Style limits communication and is non-academic in a number of places. Some relevant sources cited.
Some weaknesses in referencing technique.
Borderline
Fail
35-39%
Significant degree of irrelevance to the title/brief.
Only the most obvious issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms. Demonstrates weaknesses in knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Key issues and themes not identified or appraised.
Limited argument, which is descriptive or narrative in style with little evidence of analysis. Conclusions are neither clear nor logical. Poorly structured.
Lack of articulation.
Format deficient. For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking.
FTP ignored in text or not used where clearly needed. Deficiencies in spelling and grammar makes reading difficult.
Simplistic or repetitious style impairs clarity.
Style is non-academic. Limited sources and weak referencing.
Fail
34%
Relevance to the title/brief is intermittent or missing.
The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms. Demonstrates a lack of basic knowledge of either theory or practice for this level, with little evidence of understanding. Inadequate arguments and no analysis.
Descriptive or narrative in style with no evidence of critique.
Conclusions are sparse. Unstructured.
Lack of articulation. Format deficient For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking.
FTP as above. Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in grammar, spelling and expression.
Style is non-academic. An absence of academic sources and poor referencing technique.
