Order 2087248: Academic skillst
Page 1 of 5
LEVEL/ LEFEL 4
MODULE CODE/ COD Y MODIWL: LCBB4000
ACADEMIC SKILLS
ASSESSMENT TYPE/ MATH O ASESU: ASSIGNMENT
ASSESSMENT/COMPONENT/ ASESIAD/CYDRAN: 1
COMPONENT WEIGHTING/ PWYSAU’R CYDRAN: 25%
WORD COUNT/ NIFER Y GEIRIAU: 1250 Words
SUBMISSION DETAILS/ MANYLION CYFLWYNO:
Make sure that Your Name , Your Student Number, Your Module Title,
Assignment Title and Your Module Lecturer’s Name are clearly shown on the front
page of your assignment
• All assignments must be submitted electronically to Moodle.
• DO NOT put this form into Turnitin or it will match many similarities with other
students’ submissions.
Page 2 of 5
BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION (SOAC)
Programme: BA Business Management
Assignment Title: Academic Skills - Assessment 1
Hand Out Date: The 2ND Week of Term Submission deadline:
Please refer to the assessments schedule published on Students’ Hall in Moodle and the Assessment Board on campus
Referencing: In the main body of your submission you must give credit to authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year of publication, title of book, edition, publisher: place of publication).
Late submission will result in a late penalty mark, as follows: Up to one week late, maximum mark of 40% for first attempts and 0% for resubmissions. No work will be accepted more than one week after the submission deadline (Academic Quality Handbook 2016/17 7.5 (5))
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon the successful completion of this module, the student should be able to demonstrate the ability to:
1. Analyse the published literature relating to a management related topic and produce a fully
referenced management report
2. Design and deploy a range of primary data collection methods.
3. Evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data and present the findings to specialist and
non-specialist audiences
4. Evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to information gathering.
TASK DESCRIPTION
Assessment Component 1 – 25%
Written Group Report (1250 words per student).
Assignment 1 (outcome one): students will gather published literature relating to their chosen topic. The
literature should be credible and current. Students will analyse the literature to produce an evaluative
management report on the topic, the production of which will incorporate academic referencing and report
writing conventions.
Page 3 of 5
MARKING CRITERIA AND STUDENT FEEDBACK
This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Common Assessment Criteria Applied
1. Research-informed Literature Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions.
30
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline.
25
3. Analysis Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence
25
4. Practical Application and Deployment Deployment of methods, materials, tools and techniques; application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems.
0
5. Skills for Professional Practice Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and organisation.
20
Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. )
Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate)
k
100% Up to one week late First Attempt?
Page 4 of
BACHELORS COMMON ASSESSMENT AND MARKING CRITERIA
OUTRIGHT FAIL UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT EXCEPTIONAL
Assessment Criteria 0-29% 30-39%* 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
1. Research-informed Literature Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions
Little or no evidence of reading. Views and findings unsupported and non-authoritative. Referencing conventions largely ignored.
Poor evidence of reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Referencing conventions used inconsistently.
References to a limited range of mostly relevant sources. Some omissions and minor errors. Referencing conventions evident though not always applied consistently.
Inclusion of a range of researchinformed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions mostly consistently applied.
Inclusion of a wide range of researchinformed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of referencing conventions, consistently applied.
A comprehensive range of research informed literature embedded in the work. Excellent selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills, consistently applied.
Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Outstanding selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills consistently and professionally applied.
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline.
Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level. Substantial inaccuracies.
Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial understanding. Some significant inaccuracies.
Evidence of basic knowledge and understanding of the relevant concepts and underlying principles.
Knowledge is accurate with a good understanding of the field of study.
Knowledge is extensive. Exhibits understanding of the breadth and depth of established views.
Excellent knowledge and understanding of the main concepts and key theories. Clear awareness of challenges to established views and the limitations of the knowledge base.
Highly detailed knowledge and understanding of the main theories/concepts, and a critical awareness of the ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.
3. Analysis Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence
Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/ missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise or evaluate.
Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and contradictory. Generalised statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance.
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and some attempts to synthesise, albeit with some weaknesses. Some evidence to support findings/ views, but evidence not consistently interpreted. Some relevant conclusions and recommendations, where relevant
Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance. An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support the argument. Valid conclusions and recommendations, where relevant
Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence. Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and convincingly. Sound, convincing conclusions / recommendations.
Thoroughly logical work, supported by evaluated evidence. High quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Strong, persuasive, conclusions, justifiable recommendations.
Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Highly persuasive conclusions
4. Practical Application and Deployment Effective deployment of appropriate methods, materials, tools and techniques; extent of skill demonstrated in the application of concepts to a variety of processes and/or contexts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems.
Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques. Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.
Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed appreciation of the context of the application.
An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of wellestablished methods, materials, tools and/or techniques. Basic appreciation of the context of the application.
A good and appropriate application of standard methods, materials, tools and/or techniques. Good appreciation of the context of the application, with some use of examples, where relevant.
A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques. Very good consideration of the context of the application, with perceptive use of examples, where relevant. Evidence of some innovation and creativity.
An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques. The context of the application is well considered, with extensive use of relevant examples. Application and deployment extend beyond established conventions. Innovation and creativity evident throughout.
Outstanding levels of application and deployment skills. Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and techniques.
Page 5 of
5. Skills for Professional Practice Demonstrates attributes expected in professional practice including: individual initiative and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media to communicate (including written and oral); clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation.
Communication media is inappropriate or misapplied. Little or no evidence of autonomy in the completion of tasks. Work is poorly structured and/or largely incoherent.
Media is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience. Poor independent or collaborative initiative. Work lacks structure, organisation, and/or coherence
Can communicate in a suitable format but with some room for improvement. Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in group activities. Work lacks coherence in places and could be better structured.
Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have minor errors. Can work effectively as part of a team, with clear contribution to group activities. Mostly coherent work and is in a suitable structure.
Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a suitable format. Can work very well as part of a team, with very good contribution to group activities. Work is coherent and fluent and is well structured and organised.
Can communicate professionally and, confidently in a suitable format. Can work professionally within a team, showing leadership skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting obligations. Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.
Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of professionalism. Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team, showing advanced leadership skills. Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.
4