Marketing Channels and Logistics

Assessment Title:

A State-of-the-Art Review and Company Analysis: Use of new Technologies in Logistics and Supply Chain and their implications for Sustainability

Module Leader:

Dr Manoj Dora

Submission Deadline:

11th December 2018 by 12.00 noon on Wiseflow

Contribution to overall module assessment:

100%

Indicative student time working on assessment:

80 Hours

Word or Page Limit (if applicable):

3000 Words (NOT including references, title page and appendices) NO 5% margin

Assessment Type (individual or group):

Individual

Criteria

A (A*, A+, A, A-)

B (B+, B, B-)

C (C+, C, C-)

D (D+, D, D-)

E/F (E+, E, F)

Content:

correctness and completeness of analysis;

(60%)

Evidence of excellent and comprehensive research into the subject matter. All analyses are correct and interpreted at an exceptional level. The examples and theories are relevant to the assessment task.

Evidence of very good research into the subject matter. All analyses are correct and interpreted at an excellent. The examples and theories are relevant to the assessment task.

Evidence of good research into the subject matter. All analyses are correct and there is a high level evidenced by interpretation of theories and facts. The examples chosen are, for the most part, relevant to the assessment task

Evidence of satisfactory research into the subject matter. Most of analysis is correct and there is some evidence of sufficient interpretation of theories and facts. The examples chosen are, for the most part, reasonably relevant to the assessment task.

There is no evidence of satisfactory research into the subject matter. Analysis is incorrect and/or incomplete. The examples chosen are likely not to be reasonably relevant to the assessment task.

Writing quality and style:

narrative; grammar and punctuation; spelling; language use; length

(20%)

The writing quality and style is excellent. There is an excellent narrative. The grammar and punctuation are error-free. There are no spelling mistakes or incorrectly-used words. There are no long, confused or unwieldy sentences which detract from legibility. Material taken from other sources is accurately paraphrased; the text/style/content is that of the writer. It is within the word limit of 2500 words and is not less than 2250 words in length.

The writing quality and style is very good. There is a very good narrative. The grammar and punctuation are near error-free. There are very few, if any, spelling mistakes or incorrectly used words. There are very few, if any, long, confused or unwieldy sentences which detract from legibility. Material taken from other sources is very well paraphrased; the overall text/style/ content is for the most part that of the writer. It is within the word limit of 2500 words and is not less than 2250 words in length.

The writing quality and style is good. There is a good narrative. The grammar and punctuation is reasonable. There are a few spelling mistakes, incorrectly-used words, and/or long, confused or unwieldy sentences which detract from legibility. Material taken from other sources is well paraphrased; the overall text/style/ content is generally that of the writer. It is within the word limit of 2500 words and is not less than 2250 words in length.

The writing quality and style is adequate. There is a reasonable narrative. The grammar and punctuation is adequate. There are a number of spelling mistakes, incorrectly-used words, and/or long, confused or unwieldy sentences which detract from legibility. Material taken from other sources is only adequately paraphrased; some of the overall text/style/content is that of the writer but with some of the style of the original source(s) evident. It is within the word limit of 2500 words and is not less than 2250 words in length.

Many, or all, of the following apply: poor writing quality and style; poor narrative; the grammar and punctuation is poor; there are many spelling mistakes, incorrectly used words, and/or long, confused or unwieldy sentences which detract from legibility; material taken from other sources is inadequately paraphrased; the references are either non-existent or inadequately cited and presented; it is either above the word limit of 2500 words and is not less than 2250 words in length.

Structure:

segmentation; sequencing; (10%)

The account is presented in a professional manner; there is very clear and logical sequencing.

Very good demonstration of the aforementioned criteria, but lacks the clarity in structure and presentation.

The coursework is presented in a satisfactory report format, meeting most of the aforementioned criteria; there may be a few limitations in the logical flow between the sections, making parts of argument less easy to follow.

The structure of the text is adequately highlighted by use of appropriate sections and paragraphs; there is reasonably clear and logical sequencing.

Many, or all, of the following apply: the introduction may be missing or, if present, lacks an adequate overview and motivation for what follows; the structure of the text is inadequate; the ordering lacks a clear and logical sequence.

References / Referencing

(10%)

Excellent use of references which are accurately cited and presented in the text and in the references section.

Very good use of references which are accurately cited and presented in the text and in the references section.

Good use of references which are for the most part accurately cited and presented in the text and in the references section.

Adequate use of references which may not always be accurately cited or presented in the text or in the references section.

Weak use of references which are not accurately cited or presented in the text or in the references section.