Literature review - hifsa shaukat

Module No: 300MKT

Module title: Advanced Marketing Study (Project)

Coursework 2 of 3 (25% of total module mark): Literature Review

Word Length; maximum 2500, excluding references

Submission Due Date: 2 September 2016

Overview: Based on the preliminary research objectives constructed in Coursework 1, you are required to search relevant literature relating to your intended research topic that has been published in peer-reviewed academic journals. You are then to write a critical review regarding the appropriateness of each study's research design. Specific instructions are located below.

Be clear that you must review empirical research published as articles in peer- reviewed academic journals. Empirical studies are where the author(s) have collected and analysed data. Typically, such articles will exhibit a distinct methodology/methods section (though the actual heading will vary between articles), and a section presenting an analysis of data. Empirical research articles contrast with the other main form of articles published in peer-reviewed journals – conceptual articles. Conceptual articles typically review the literature on a certain subject, or may develop theoretical ideas without analysing data. Conceptual articles are not suitable for this assignment. There is no date limit on the articles you review. Ask your lecturer if unsure.

Peer-reviewed academic journals are those held by university libraries. Students can search for relevant research articles by searching scholarly databases such as Google Scholar or Proquest. Full-text articles may then be retrieved by searching in the CU Library catalogue, or in some cases scholarly databases may provide a direct link through to the full-text. Note that trade/industry practitioner publications are not a suitable source of research for this assignment.

Credits/Weighting: This assessment contributes 25% to total module mark (5 credits). It is expected that this work will form the basis of one chapter of your final project. However, the Literature Review chapter in the final project should be developed and refined from the version submitted at this stage. You should

stay up to date with developments in your topic area right up to your final project submission date and you should also use the feedback from this piece of coursework to enhance your final submission.

To pre-empt any misunderstanding the mark awarded for this assessment will be your final mark for the first 25% of the module, whilst you can improve on your literature review chapter in your final submission, this will only affect the remaining 75% of credits available.

The Brief: Your literature review should be structured as follows:

Research aim and objectives: Insert your research aim and objectives (or questions/hypotheses if applicable). You may use the aim and objectives from Coursework 1, or if you have refined your aim and objectives since then, you may insert the newer version. This is to assist the marker in understanding the context in which the empirical studies have been reviewed.

Literature review of empirical studies: Address each empirical study you have retrieved separately (use a sub-heading for each, and identify the title, author[s], and year of publication for each piece). Be sure to afford an equal length coverage to each study. Give a very brief overview of each study so that the reader understands what each study did and in what context (do not go into great detail here, remember that the emphasis is on critically reviewing each study's research design).

In undertaking your literature review for each study, comment specifically on each of the following issues:

• Methodological choice • Nature of the research • Research strategy.

When reviewing these considerations for each empirical study, bear in mind that the author(s) may or may not state explicitly whether (for example) the study was exploratory in nature, or adopted a case study strategy. You may need to do some interpretation.

Remember that you need to critically review each piece of research. Reviews that merely describe what was done will attract only elementary marks. Argue as to why or why not you believe that the researcher(s) made prudent choices in formulating their research design. It is insufficient to simply state that "I believe that … ," your argument must be logical and complete.

Conclusion and implications for your research: Round off your literature review with 1–2 paragraphs discussing the implications of what you have read for your own proposed project. Aspects you might consider discussing here include what is the current methodological state of play in your intended area of research? What lessons have you learned? What research design do you believe might be appropriate for your own study, and why?

Reference list: Each empirical study that you have reviewed must appear in the reference list. Any other references cited within your methodological review must appear in the list of references. Reference list entries should adhere to the prescribed style guide. There should be a single reference list (i.e., not separate ones for journal articles and websites etc.), with citations listed in alphabetical order.   Presentation guidelines Text Your methodological review should be in Times New Roman font size 12, with 1.5 spacing and 3 cm left and right margins. Pages should be numbered and your name and student number should appear in the header or footer of each page. Headings in the text should be 14 point, while all other text should be in 12 point.

Learning Outcomes Assessed: Identify and critically review relevant business concepts and theories from the available academic literature

Marking Scheme:

Structure (10%) Content must be organised and focused on the research question. The structure must be clear and coherent and there should be a logical flow of information from one section to the next. Your arguments should be presented clearly and succinctly.

Knowledge and Understanding (20%) Your literature review should identify, explain, draw on appropriate theories, models, and literature to demonstrate the depth of reading relating to your research questions/objectives.

Application (20%) Your literature review should clearly indicate how the various theories and models relate to your research questions and selected context e.g. industry, product.

Analysis and Recommendations (40%) Your review of the literature should be critical and this is of key importance in this coursework. So you should demonstrate that you have evaluated and critically analysed the topic, synthesised the various ideas and concepts, reached appropriate conclusions which you have justified with evidence from the literature.

Presentation 10% Demonstrating a high level of academic writing style is important in this coursework as are accurate spelling, punctuation, grammar, layout, and CU Harvard Referencing style.

Submission information:

Please note: 1. Please note that work submitted late (where an extension/deferral has not been granted)

will automatically attract a result of 0%. This will count as a failed attempt, and may result in you failing the module overall. You may be eligible to resit the failed assessment(s), subject to the University’s regulations on reassessment. The maximum module mark that can be awarded for resit work is 40%.

2. Extensions will be in accordance with University and Faculty policy.

Students MUST keep copies (electronic file if done on computer) of their assignment. Please also submit an electronic copy of your assignment via the module web using the Turnitin icon. (See instructions on module web)

The electronic version of your assignment may be used to enable checks to be made using anti- plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites.

Any penalties for not complying with word limits will be in accordance with

University and Faculty policy.

Marking Scheme A copy of the marking scheme and feedback for this coursework is attached in Appendix 1.

Return of Marked Work Marked work will be returned by your supervisor in tutorials or individual meetings. You can expect to have marked work returned to you by 2 teaching weeks after the submission date.

PLAGIARISM WARNING! – Assignments should not be copied in part or in whole from any other source (including previous work of your own) except for any marked up quotations, that clearly distinguish what has been quoted from your own work. All references used must be given, and the specific page number used should also be given for any direct quotations, which should be in inverted commas. Students found copying from the internet or other sources will get zero marks and may be excluded from the university.

Note: Please make sure that your ID number and the module number appear on the actual coursework assignment as well as on the cover sheet that you attach to it.

In addition indicate on your cover sheet your supervisor’s name to ensure that your assignment goes to the correct person for marking.

Appendix 1

Marking Scheme Rubric Sheet – 300MKT Literature Review CW2

Name: _______________________________________ Student ID No. __________________________

Marketing Criteria

Poor Fair Adequate Good Excellent

Structure (10%)

         

Content is organised and appropriate; coherent; the flow of information, arguments, concepts          

Knowledg e and Understan ding (20%)           Identifies, explains, draws on appropriate theories, models, literature to demonstrate depth and breadth of reading to address the question          

Applicatio n (20%)           Application of theory or practical examples were given appropriately to context          

Analysis and Recomme ndations (40%) Evaluation and critical analysis of the topic, synthesis of ideas/concepts, appropriate conclusions, justified recommendation s.

Presentati on (10%) Spelling, punctuation, grammar, layout, accurate CU Harvard Referencing style, writing style academic/ professional

Feedback grading: <40 Poor; 40-49 Satisfactory; 50-59 Good; 60-69 Very Good; 70+ Excellent

First Marker: Date:

Second Marker: Date: General Comments:

Agreed Mark:

First Marker Mark:

Second Marker Mark: