global bussiness managment

Criteria

High Distinction (85 – 100%)

Distinction (75-84%)

Credit (65-74%)

Pass (50- 64%)

Fail (0-49%)

Demonstrated knowledge of relevant market-based frameworks (5 marks)

Systematic and skilful

Evidence of advanced understanding of relevant management frameworks and concepts using a wide range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Thorough and proficient

Evidence of evaluative ability to convey knowledge of relevant management concepts using a moderate range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Effective

Evidence of effective knowledge of relevant management frameworks and concepts from an acceptable range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Basic

Evidence of a satisfactory level of knowledge of relevant management concepts from a limited range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Unclear

Inadequate ability to demonstrate any knowledge of relevant management concepts displaying limited knowledge and understanding and without credible sources from the scholarly literature

Ability to apply relevant cross-border strategy frameworks and concepts (5 marks)

Systematic and skilful

Evidence of strong evaluative ability to apply relevant management frameworks and concepts using a wide range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Thorough and proficient

Examines the connections between theory and practice and draws thoughtful conclusions. Evidence of moderate evaluative ability to apply relevant management concepts using a moderate range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Effective

Evidence of discussion and some ability to apply relevant management frameworks and concepts from an acceptable range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Basic

Evidence of some explanation and adequate ability to apply relevant management concepts from a limited range of credible sources from the scholarly literature

Unclear

Inadequate ability to apply relevant management concepts displaying limited knowledge and understanding and without credible sources from the scholarly literature

Quality of analysis and argument including relevant supporting data (5 marks)

Systematic and skilful

Data/evidence is organised and relationships are interpreted. Analysis reveals insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to topic

Thorough and proficient

Data/evidence reveals important patterns, differences, or similarities. Analysis is thorough and proficient highlighting understanding of the topic

Effective

Data/evidence is provided and relationships are identified and described. Analysis identifies patterns, differences, or similarities which are mostly related to the topic

Basic

Data/evidence is described. Relationships between parts of the data and what they may mean are identified. Analysis is satisfactory

Lacks organisation

Data is lacking and unorganised. Limited evidence of analysis and somewhat unrelated to the topic

Presentation of professional written material – adherence to word count, format, structure, page numbering, spelling and grammar (5 marks)

Meticulous

Presents work of a highly professional standard in correct format, free from errors of spelling, grammar or English expression. Well-articulated and logically structured. In-text referencing and list of references accurately adopts the Harvard referencing style

Competent

Presents work of a professional standard and in correct format, mostly free from errors of spelling, grammar or English expression and logically structured most of the time. In-text referencing and list of references mostly adopts the Harvard referencing style

Effective

Presents work in correct format with minimal errors of spelling, grammar or English expression and logically structured some of the time. In-text referencing and list of references somewhat resembles the Harvard referencing style

Basic

Presents work in an acceptable format with some errors of spelling, grammar and English expression with reasonable structure. In-text referencing and the list of references are satisfactory

Inadequate

Does not present work in correct formal written format. Presents work with numerous errors of spelling, grammar and/or English expression. Unstructured and does not provide in-text and/or in the list of references