Entrepreneurship and Innovation Assignment

Mngt 1002 Essay Marking

Course Coordinator: Garry Haworth

Essay – Compare and contrast Entrepreneurship & Innovation

F

P

C

D

HD

Identification and discussion of definitions of entrepreneurship and Innovation (2 marks)

Comparison and contrasting of benefits of entrepreneurship and innovation (3 marks)

Comparison and contrasting of detriments of entrepreneurship and innovation (3 marks)

Discussion of economic and social implications for entrepreneurship and innovation (2 marks)

Coverage of relevant theoretical issues, including integration of relevant literature (academic and applied industry) (2 marks)

Structure, including logic and reasoning (how well argued) (1 mark)

Depth of research (academic and industry) ( 1 mark)

Validity of argument development, including referencing style, spelling and grammar (1 mark)

Comments:

MNGT1002 Introduction to Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction

Identification and discussion of

definitions of entrepreneurship and

innovation

Very narrowly researched minimal or no

academic sources used

Narrow research, some validity using

academic sources

Widely researched and discussed with

multiple sources supporting the

ideas/issues in the definitions

Very good research and discussion

demonstrating the width and depth of

academic sources used to support the

presented definitions

Excellent

validated

definitions with

concise and

insightful

discussion

Comparison and contrasting of

benefits of entrepreneurship and

innovation

Very poor or NO critical analysis. No

comparative arguments. Discussion

presents strong biases.

Poor critical and comparative analysis.

Discussion presents some biases.

Good critical and comparative analysis

with two-fold arguments presenting a

balanced discussion

Very good critical and comparative analysis

with strong two-fold arguments presenting

a balanced discussion

Excellent

formation of

comparative

argument, with

quality validation

Comparison and contrasting of

detriments of entrepreneurship and

innovation

Very poor or NO critical analysis. No

comparative arguments. Discussion

presents strong biases.

Poor critical and comparative analysis.

Discussion presents some biases.

Good critical and comparative analysis

with two-fold arguments presenting a

balanced discussion

Very good critical and comparative analysis

with strong two-fold arguments presenting

a balanced discussion

Excellent

formation of

comparative

argument, with

quality validation

Discussion of economic and social

implications for entrepreneurship

and innovation

Rudimentary logic with limited

connection between ideas.

OR

Lack of logic random collection of

ideas

Adequate logic, discussion and analyses of

some issues.

Sound logic, discussion and analyses all

issues.

Sound logic, discussion and superior

analyses of all issues

Excellent logic,

discussion and

analyses of all

issues

Coverage of relevant theoretical

issues, including integration of

relevant literature (academic and

applied industry)

Very narrow discussion around theories

and empirical issues to substantiate

arguments and very poorly integrated

OR

Discussion limited to the textbook and

course material with no empirical issues

to substantiate arguments

Uses a variety of theories and empirical

issues to substantiate arguments;

however not well integrated

OR

Narrowly researched; but attempted to

integrate theories and empirical issues

Uses a variety of well integrated theories

and empirical issues to substantiate

arguments

Uses a wide variety of well integrated

theories and empirical issues to

substantiate arguments

Displays excellent

integration of

academic and

industry sources

and breadth of

relevant

theoretical issues

Structure, including logic and

reasoning (how well argued)

Poor to Rudimentary logic with limited

connection between ideas.

OR

Lack of logic random collection of

ideas

Adequate logic, discussion and analysis of

some issues.

Sound logic, discussion and analyses all

issues.

Sound logic, discussion and superior

analyses of all issues

Excellent logic,

discussion and

analyses of all

issues

Demonstrated depth of academic

and applicable industry research

Very narrowly researched with hardly any

academic sources used

Narrow research, but some quality

academic sources have been used

Widely researched with multiple sources

supporting the ideas/issues in the

arguments

Very good research demonstrating the

width and depth of academic sources used

to support the presented discussion.

Excellent research

demonstrating

the width and

depth of

academic sources

used to support

the presented

discussion.

Demonstrated validation of

argument, including referencing

style

Sentence structure and grammar

inadequate for clarity and/or

incomplete/incorrect referencing of

sourced material.

Sentence structure and grammar

adequate, but errors cause distraction

and/or errors in referencing.

Sentence structure and grammar

adequate, with minor errors that do not

distract reader from the main message.

Some incorrect referencing maybe present

Sentence structures and grammar are good

with correct referencing of all sourced

material.

Excellent validity

of argument,

displaying high

standards of

academic writing

and referencing

Course Coordinator: Garry Haworth