1Goodexample-nocomments ArticleCritiqueInstructions_Spring2020_mineds1 xArticleCritiqueSelf-RatingRubricSpring2020fin-1 MODULEHANDBOOKBAAcademicSkills xIMG_0535 IMG_0529 IMG_0528 fullsizeoutput_17ad IMG_0539 IMG_0527 IMG_0538 IMG_0541 IMG_0534 IMG_0532 IMG_0540 IMG_0533 IMG_0537 IMG_0536 remote53e192fe00000236.movdBUdSWQpTKC9tZEuQsTRNw remote53e192fe00000233.movQ5YKkjXCRBuhp6KsvoHQg qSXRqyTQLeDVaqQsblT0w qHCJ5649RHWg1UT1qcsjWQ 4e5DVpiwTT2POZ9S0bZKXw 0HJnsAt8S2yCTAMcPKHKg 1521639 e7X5u1ckRFugqExwRyzbqA N2pcrsjTGyMseywNYAAJA IMG_0506.movIMG_0543 IMG_0504.movIMG_0505.movremote53e192fe00000232.movIMG_0503.mov
- Type of paperEssay (Any Type)
- SubjectBusiness
- Number of pages10
- Format of citationHarvard
- Number of cited resources20
- Type of serviceWriting
these files are all about our assigmemt, we had 6 or 7 speaker in master classes I just mention three of them stifyn parri or mr producer second one kate jenkins the founder of a gower brownies and mark power the owener of smoke haus in swansea(uk) all information are in their blog. our project was feed a child I send you the all about aor background and our abjective we arer were 6 student in group work together to collect food and money for family who cant feed their kids during school holiday , our blog is www.feedachildswansea.worldpress.com . please link the master class information to our project.
Running head: DO WEAPONS MAKE PEOPLE AGGRESSIVE? 1
DO WEAPONS MAKE PEOPLE AGGRESSIVE
7
Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli
Jane Doe
Florida International University
Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli
Summary:
Berkowitz and Lepage (1967) designed a study to test the hypothesis that individuals who are in a state of anger are more likely to act out their aggression if cues associated with violence and aggression are present. The sample consisted of 100 male students from the University of Wisconsin who were all enrolled in an introductory level psychology course.
This study used an experimental research method because it manipulated the independent variable and presumably involved random assignment (although this was not stated in the text). There were two main independent variables. The first one was the subject’s level of anger and this was determined by whether the subject was shocked once or seven times. The second independent variable was the kind of cue present near the shock button when it was the subject’s turn to evaluate the confederate. For one group there was no object, in the control group there was a neutral object (a badminton racquet), and for the last group there was a gun that was supposedly part of a different study. This last group was further separated into 2 subgroups with some being told that the gun belonged to the confederate while others were told that it was left behind by someone else. These independent variables were then combined to see how they affected the dependent variable, which was the level of aggression the subject displayed. The dependent variable was measured by how many shocks the subject delivered to the confederate.
The procedure ran as follows: volunteers were told that they were participating in a study to test the physiological effects of stress. To do this the subject and the other participant (who was actually a confederate) were both given a social problem and they had to think up ways to solve it. After they completed this task (in separate rooms) their problem solving ideas were then exchanged so they could evaluate each other. The evaluation was done by pushing a button that was supposed to shock the person in the other room (although they still could not see each other); 1 shock represented the best rating while a lesser evaluation was communicated through a higher number of shocks. The confederate was the first to do the evaluation. The number of shocks given to the actual volunteer was already determined as 1 or 7 though (depending on the random assignment) and was not based on a real rating. After this came the volunteer’s turn to do the same evaluation, but the number of shocks was not predetermined. Next to the shock button was one of the previously stated objects, and the gun was the only cue hypothesized to elicit increased aggression.
The results of this study confirmed the hypothesis. Those participants who were more angered (given 7 shocks) and were cued by the violent object (a gun) and told that it belonged to the person they were rating, outwardly expressed their aggression the most by giving the confederate a higher number of shocks. The next highest number of shocks was by the group in the presence of a gun, but had been told the gun was left behind by someone else. Those who did not see any objects gave on average one less shock and the least number of shocks were given by those in the presence of the badminton racquets. On the other hand, when the volunteer was not as angered (only shocked once by the confederate), outward expression of aggression was relatively low and stable regardless of what type of cue was present. The researchers used these results to theorize that a person who is already aroused and is then cued by a violent object is more likely to have an impulsive reaction to act more aggressively.
Critique:
Overall this study was well designed in order to test the given hypothesis that weapons are aggression-eliciting stimuli. The method of using different objects to induce a given response is very similar to the proven phenomenon of priming. Priming is where certain information is more attended to when related cues are presented. Therefore the results of Berkowitz and Lepage (1967) make sense because weapons are connected to aggression, which increases the person’s awareness of his or her aggressive feelings, and consequently makes the outward act of aggression more likely.
Based on the results, chances are high that these men would always act in this way when in a similar situation, so this study can be considered reliable (that is, it is repeatable). Validity is not as strong, though. Validity refers to whether the study is measuring what it purports to measure. When the participant was already aroused (given 7 shocks) there was a significant difference in the amount of retaliation depending on which cue was present. However, this retaliation did not depend on the cues if the participant was not as initially aroused (only given 1 shock). So how can they be measuring the impact of a priming mechanism like the gun in the room if they need participants to already be aroused? I am not sure they are measuring their variables correctly. That being said, it did show that although the cues do have an effect on aggressive behavior, initial aggression level plays a much larger role in the causal relationship. The ethicalness of this study is also questionable. Receiving and delivering shocks could potentially cause physical pain and also have a negative effect on one’s emotional well-being. Nonetheless, most participants probably did not suffer any serious consequences. Also, due to the nature of this specific research question it does not seem like there is another way to measure aggression that would be anymore ethical.
One major methodological problem that should have been addressed is the sample that was obtained. The sample used in this experiment is not a good representation of humans in general, because it only involved college-aged men. It is possible that women or people of different ages may respond differently to the cues. Women are often thought of as less violent, so their reaction to a negative stimulus might cause them to deliver fewer shocks. A weapon makes the seriousness of the situation salient and may cause some people to think rationally about their behavior in the near future. Clearly this proposal requires actual testing before making further assumptions, but it does show the need for a more diverse sample of participants.
Along the same line as the previous issue, a follow-up study could more carefully look at the relationship between peoples’ attitudes towards guns (or other weapons) and their corresponding level of aggressive behavior when given the chance to retaliate. This would be more of a quasi-experiment because in order to test the independent variable of attitudes towards weapons the groups could not be randomly assigned. Three existing groups would be used; those who support weapons, those who are against them, and those who feel neutral (the control group). The hypothesis would predict that if prior arousal level was high, participants who support weapons would show increased aggression when cued by the gun, but the group of participants with negative attitudes towards guns would not be as aggressive. If the subjects did not receive prior arousal (if they were only shocked once by their “evaluator”), then neither group would be significantly affected by the cues.
Even if initial aggression is a greater cause in inducing violent behavior than the existence of weapon-related cues, this study has serious implications for social policies related to gun control. It is apparent from the results that if someone is angry and is near a gun, then that person will likely act more aggressively than he or she typically would. Since the guns in the experiment were not loaded and the situation was controlled, the heightened aggression was not transferred over to actually using the guns. In a private home though, arguments occurring with a gun nearby might make it more likely that a gun will be used. Knowing that the mere presence of a weapon increases violence should urge lawmakers to consider adopting stricter gun laws.
Brief summary
Berkowitz and Lepage (1967) conducted a study in which they hypothesized that priming people with an aggressive object (a gun) would lead them to act aggressively. The authors gave electrical shocks (from 1 to 7 of them) to 100 male undergraduates. They told them that one of their peers had delivered the shock. The participant could then retaliate, but they did so in the presence of either a gun or a tennis racket (which was supposedly left in the researcher room from a different study). Participants given the highest number of shocks (7) gave higher retaliation shocks to the peer, but this was more likely when they were in the presence of a gun (compared to a tennis racket). The authors concluded that the guns increased aggressive responses from male participants who were highly aroused.
References
Berkowitz, L., & Lepage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 202-207. doi:
10.1037/h0025008
Running head: ARTICLE CRITIQUE INSTRUCTIONS 1
ARTICLE CRITIQUE INSTRUCTIONS 2
Article Critique Instructions (60 points possible)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Purpose of The Article Critique Paper
1). Psychological Purpose
This paper serves several purposes, the first of which is helping you gain insight into research papers in psychology. As this may be your first time reading and writing papers in psychology, one goal of Paper I is to give you insight into what goes into such papers. This article critique paper will help you learn about the various sections of an empirical research report by reading at least one peer-reviewed articles (articles that have a Title Page, Abstract*, Literature Review, Methods Section, Results Section, and References Page—I have already selected some articles for you to critique, so make sure you only critique one in the folder provided on Canvas) This paper will also give you some insights into how the results sections are written in APA formatted research articles. Pay close attention to those sections, as throughout this course you’ll be writing up some results of your own!
In this relatively short paper, you will read one of five articles posted on Canvas and summarize what the authors did and what they found. The first part of the paper should focus on summarizing the design the authors used for their project. That is, you will identify the independent and dependent variables, talk about how the authors carried out their study, and then summarize the results (you don’t need to fully understand the statistics in the results, but try to get a sense of what the authors did in their analyses). In the second part of the paper, you will critique the article for its methodological strengths and weaknesses. Finally, in part three, you will provide your references for the Article Critique Paper in APA format.
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of the Article Critique paper is to teach you proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting. In the instructions below, I tell you how to format your paper using APA style. There are a lot of very specific requirements in APA papers, so pay attention to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your textbook! I highly recommend using the Paper I Checklist before submitting your paper, as it will help walk you through the picky nuances of APA formatting.
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you grow as a writer. Few psychology classes give you the chance to write papers and receive feedback on your work. This class will! We will give you feedback on this paper in terms of content, spelling, and grammar.
Article Critique Paper (60 points possible)
Each student is required to write an article critique paper based on one of the research articles present on Canvas only those articles listed on Canvas can be critiqued – if you critique a different article, it will not be graded). If you are unclear about any of this information, please ask.
What is an article critique paper?
An article critique is a written communication that conveys your understanding of a research article and how it relates to the conceptual issues of interest to this course.
This article critique paper will include 5 things:
1. Title page: 1 page (4 points)
· Use APA style to present the appropriate information:
· A Running head must be included and formatted APA style
· The phrase “Running head” is at the top of the title page followed by a short title of your creation (no more than 50 characters) that is in ALL CAPS. This running head is left-justified (flush left on the page). Note that the “h” in head is all lower case! Look at the first page of these instructions, and you will see how to set up your Running head.
· There must be a page number on the title page that is right justified. It is included in the header
· Your paper title appears on the title page. This is usually 12 words or less, and the first letter of each word is capitalized. It should be descriptive of the paper (For this paper, you should use the title of the article you are critiquing. The paper title can be the same title as in the Running head or it can differ – your choice)
· Your name will appear on the title page
· Your institution will appear on the title page as well
· For all papers, make sure to double-space EVERYTHING and use Times New Roman font. This includes everything from the title page through the references.
· This is standard APA format. ALL of your future papers will include a similar title page
2. Summary of the Article: 1 ½ page minimum, 3 pages maximum – 14 points)
An article critique should briefly summarize, in your own words, the article research question and how it was addressed in the article. Below are some things to include in your summary.
· The summary itself will include the following: (Note – if the article involved more than one experiment, you can either choose to focus on one of the studies specifically or summarize the general design for all of the studies)
1. Type of study (Was it experimental or correlational? How do you know?)
2. Variables (What were the independent and dependent variables? How did they manipulate the IV? How did they operationally define the DV? Be specific with these. Define the terms independent and dependent variable and make sure to identify how they are operationally defined in the article)
3. Method (What did the participants do in the study? How was it set up? Was there a random sample of participants? Was there random assignment to groups?). How was data collected (online, in person, in a laboratory?).
4. Summary of findings (What were their findings?)
· Make sure that:
1. The CAPS portion of your running head should also appear on the first page of your paper, but it will NOT include the phrase “Running head” this time, only the same title as the running head from the first paper in ALL CAPS. Again, see the example paper. There is a powerpoint presentation on using Microsoft Word that can help you figure out how to have a different header on the title page (where “Running head” is present) and other pages in the paper (where “Running head” is NOT present). You can also find how-to information like this using youtube!
2. If you look at the header in pages 2 through 5 (including THIS current page 4 that you are reading right now!), you will see “Running head” omitted. It simply has the short title (ARTICLE CRITIQUE PAPER INSTRUCTIONS) all in caps, followed by the page number.
3. The same title used on the title page should be at the top of the page on the first actual line of the paper, centered.
4. For this paper, add the word “Summary” below the title, and have it flush left. Then write your summary of the article below that.
3. Critique of the study: 1 ½ pages minimum – 3 pages maximum – 16 points)
1. This portion of the article critique assignment focuses on your own thoughts about the content of the article (i.e. your own ideas in your own words). For this section, please use the word “Critique” below the last sentence in your summary, and have the word “Critique” flush left.
1. This section is a bit harder, but there are a number of ways to demonstrate critical thinking in your writing. Address at least four of the following elements. You can address more than four, but four is the minimum.
· 1). In your opinion, are there any confounding variables in the study (these could be extraneous variables or nuisance variables)? If so, explain what the confound is and specifically how it is impacting the results of the study. A sufficient explanation of this will include at least one paragraph of writing.
· 2). Is the sample used in the study an appropriate sample? Is the sample representative of the population? Could the study be replicated if it were done again? Why or why not?
· 3). Did they measure the dependent variable in a way that is valid? Be sure to explain what validity is, and why you believe the dependent variable was or was not measured in a way that was valid.
· 4). Did the study authors correctly interpret their findings, or are there any alternative interpretations you can think of?
· 5). Did the authors of the study employ appropriate ethical safeguards?
· 6). Briefly describe a follow-up study you might design that builds on the findings of the study you read how the research presented in the article relates to research, articles or material covered in other sections of the course
· 7). Describe whether you feel the results presented in the article are weaker or stronger than the authors claim (and why); or discuss alternative interpretations of the results (i.e. something not mentioned by the authors) and/or what research might provide a test between the proposed and alternate interpretations
· 8). Mention additional implications of the findings not mentioned in the article (either theoretical or practical/applied)
· 9). Identify specific problems in the theory, discussion or empirical research presented in the article and how these problems could be corrected. If the problems you discuss are methodological in nature, then they must be issues that are substantial enough to affect the interpretations of the findings or arguments presented in the article. Furthermore, for methodological problems, you must justify not only why something is problematic but also how it could be resolved and why your proposed solution would be preferable.
· 10). Describe how/why the method used in the article is either better or worse for addressing a particular issue than other methods
4. Brief summary of the article: One or paragraphs (6 points)
· Write the words “Brief Summary”, and then begin the brief summary below this
· In ONE or TWO paragraphs maximum, summarize the article again, but this time I want it to be very short. In other words, take all of the information that you talked about in the summary portion of this assignment and write it again, but this time in only a few sentences.
· The reason for this section is that I want to make sure you can understand the whole study but that you can also write about it in a shorter paragraph that still emphasizes the main points of the article. Pretend that you are writing your own literature review for a research study, and you need to get the gist of an article that you read that helps support your own research across to your reader. Make sure to cite the original study (the article you are critiquing).
5. References – 1 page (4 points)
· Provide the reference for this article in proper APA format (see the book Chapter 14 for appropriate referencing guidelines or the Chapter 14 powerpoint).
· If you cited other sources during either your critique or summary, reference them as well (though you do not need to cite other sources in this assignment – this is merely optional IF you happen to bring in other sources). Formatting counts here, so make sure to italicize where appropriate and watch which words you are capitalizing!
6. Grammar and Writing Quality (6 points)
· Few psychology courses are as writing intensive as Research Methods (especially Research Methods Two next semester!). As such, I want to make sure that you develop writing skills early. This is something that needs special attention, so make sure to proofread your papers carefully.
· Avoid run-on sentences, sentence fragments, spelling errors, and grammar errors. Writing quality will become more important in future papers, but this is where you should start to hone your writing skills.
· We will give you feedback on your papers, but I recommend seeking some help from the FIU writing center to make sure your paper is clear, precise, and covers all needed material. I also recommend asking a few of your group members to read over your paper and make suggestions. You can do the same for them!
· If your paper lacks originality and contains too much overlap with the paper you are summarizing (i.e. you do not paraphrase appropriately or cite your sources properly), you will lose some or all of the points from writing quality, depending on the extent of the overlap with the paper. For example, if sentences contain only one or two words changed from a sentence in the original paper, you will lose points from writing quality.
Please note that you do not need to refer to any other sources other than the article on which you have chosen to write your paper. However, you are welcome to refer to additional sources if you choose.
7. Self-Rating Rubric (10 points). On canvas, you will find a self-rating rubric. This rubric contains a summary of all the points available to you in this paper. You must submit your ratings for your own paper, using this rubric (essentially, you’ll grade your own paper before you hand it in). You will upload your completed rubric to the “article critique rubric” assignment on Canvas.
· Please put effort into your ratings. Do not simply give yourself a 50/50. Really reflect on the quality of your paper and whether you meet all the criteria listed.
1. If it is clear that you have not reflected sufficiently on your paper (e.g., you give a rating of 2/2 for something that is not included in your paper), you will lose points.
· This does not mean that you are guaranteed whatever grade you give to yourself. Instead, this will help you to 1) make sure that you have included everything you need to include, and 2) help you to reflect on your own writing.
· In fact, we will use this very same rubric when we grade your paper, so you should know exactly what to expect for your grade!
Other guidelines for the article critique papers
1. 1). Pay attention to the page length requirements – 1 page for the title page, 1.5 pages to 3 pages for the summary, 1.5 pages to 3 pages for the critique, one or two paragraphs for the brief summary, and 1 page for the references page. If you are under the minimum, we will deduct points. If you go over the maximum, we are a little more flexible (you can go over by half page or so), but we want you to try to keep it to the maximum page.
1. 2). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set one inch on all sides. You
must
use 12-point Times New Roman font.
1. 3). As a general rule, ALL paragraphs and sentences are double spaced in APA papers. It even includes the references, so make sure to double space EVERYTHING
1. 4). When summarizing the article in your own words, you need not continually cite the article throughout the rest of your critique. Nonetheless, you should follow proper referencing procedures, which means that:
3. If you are inserting a direct quote from any source, it must be enclosed in quotations and followed by a parenthetical reference to the source. “Let’s say I am directly quoting this current sentence and the next. I would then cite it with the author name, date of publication, and the page number for the direct quote” (Winter, 2013, p . 4).
0. Note: We will deduct points if you quote more than once per page, so keep quotes to a minimum. Paraphrase instead, but make sure you still give the original author credit for the material by citing him or using the author’s name (“In this article, Smith noted that …” or “In this article, the authors noted that…”)
3. If you choose to reference any source other than your chosen article, it must be listed in a reference list.
1. 5). Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work. Writing quality will become more important in future papers, so you should start working on that now!
If you have any questions about the articles, your ideas, or your writing, please ask. Although we won’t be able to review entire drafts of papers before they are handed in, we are very willing to discuss problems, concerns or issues that you might have.
PSY 3211 Article Critique Self-Rating Rubric
You will get 10 points for filling out and submitting this along with your article critique paper. The purpose of this is for you to reflect on the quality of your paper. This is due on the same day that the article critique is due.
Place your rating for each category below, then add your ratings for each category at the bottom where it says “total”. For example, if you believe that your description of the kind of study deserves 3 out of 4 points (because you know your explanation is not sufficient), it should look like this: “your rating: 3” Please write your ratings in a different color font so that they are easier to see.
Please put effort into your ratings. Do not simply give yourself a 50/50. Really reflect on the quality of your paper and whether you meet all the criteria listed. If it is clear that you have not reflected sufficiently on your paper (e.g., you give a rating of 2/2 for something that is actually missing form your paper), you will lose points.
We will use this very same rubric when we grade your paper! This does not mean that you are guaranteed to get the grade you give yourself, but it should help to minimize any surprises when you get your grade.
Title page (4 points total) |
|||
Your Rating: |
Header |
||
a) Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with a lower case h)? Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS? oes your header on this second page omit the phrase “Running head”—1 point |
|||
b) Is everything in your paper in 12 point Times New Roman font?—1 points |
|||
c) Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12 point Times New Roman font)? —-0.5 points |
|||
Title / Name / Institution |
|||
d) Do all title words with four letters or more start with a capital letter?— 0.5 points |
|||
e) Are your name and institution correct? Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times New Roman font? —1 points |
|||
Total for Title Page (add up your ratings for a-e): |
|||
Summary of the Article (14 points total) |
|||
General Format and Header |
|||
f) Is your header title present and identical to your header title on the title page? —1 points |
|||
g) Does your summary have min 1 and half page and max 3 pages? —2 points |
|||
Summary of the Article |
|||
h) Does your summary note the type of design (experimental vs. correlational)? —2 points |
|||
i) Does your summary note the independent variables? —2 points |
|||
j) Does your summary note dependent variables? —2 points |
|||
k) Does your summary describe the methods for the article, including participants, measurement, methodology, and procedure? —3 points |
|||
l) Does your summary describe the findings? —2 points |
|||
Total for Summary (add up your ratings for f-l): |
|||
Your Rating: |
Critique of the Article (16 points total) |
||
Does your critique identify at least four of the needed elements (validity and reliability, interpreting findings, ethics, follow-up study, weak vs strong results, implications not mentioned in the article, theory problems, why the methods used are better or worse than alternatives —Each element is worth 4 points, and must include sufficient detail and explanation. |
|||
Total for Critique (add up your ratings for each of the 4 critiques) |
|||
Brief Summary (6 points total) |
|||
m) Do you summarize the article in one to two paragraphs? —1 points |
|||
n) Does your brief summary highlight the main article points (hypotheses, method, and subjects)? —3 points |
|||
o) Does your brief summary highlight the conclusions drawn by authors? —2 points |
|||
Total for Brief Summary (add up your ratings for m-o): |
In-text Citations and References Page (4 points total) |
In-text Citation |
p) Are in-text citations (including direct quotations) in APA format? —2 points |
References |
q) Are your references in APA format? —2 points |
Total for Brief Summary (add up your ratings for p & q): |
Grammar and Writing Quality (6 points total) |
Check your grammar and writing for the entire paper. Make sure to proof read, and cite & paraphrase properly. Avoid personal pronouns like “us”, “we”, “you”, and “I”. For a scientific paper like this, go with more objective words like “people”, “participants”, “users”, or “viewers” etc. If your paper lacks originality and contains too much overlap with the paper you are summarizing (i.e. you do not paraphrase appropriately or cite your sources properly), you will lose some or all of the points from writing quality, depending on the extent of the overlap with the paper. For example, if sentences contain only one or two words changed from a sentence in the original paper, you will lose points from writing quality. |
Your Rating for Writing Quality: |
Your Total Grade: /50 points (add up all “total ratings” above from each of the 6 categories to get your total self-grade).
MODULEHANDBOOK BA
M4X01434
Academic skills
LEVEL 4
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT
FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT
20
17-2018
MODULE CODE: M4X01434
TITLE: Academic Skills
DATED: July 2016
LEVEL: 4
CREDITS 20
JACS CODE: N
10
0
AIM(S)
The skills needed for higher education are ultimately gained through studying at that level; they evolve and mature through practice, trial and error, feedback from others and student reflection
.
This module aims to provide students with the underlying study/research strategies and software skills that can accelerate that learning process. Students will be encouraged to develop a reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and to take responsibility for their own learning. Such skills promote a deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout the programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the transferable skills desired in the employment context.
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.
INDICATIVE CONTENT
·
Identifying skills (e.g. self-evaluation, skills needed for higher education, transferable/employment skills).
· Organising study (e.g. time management, organising space, organising resources)
· Gathering relevant information (e.g. effective note taking, using the library and the internet, reflecting on experience)
· Communicating and presenting information (e.g. presentation techniques, styles)
· Developing an appropriate writing style (e.g. planning and structuring essays and reports, linking ideas together, using facts, opinions or arguments, analytical thinking, etc.)
· Referencing convention (e.g. the Harvard System)
· Revision and examination techniques (e.g. preparation, organisation, memory aids, managing stress)
· Using computers and e-learning to support learning (e.g. the VLE, Internet search techniques)
· Key research skills/data collection methods (e.g. primary and secondary sources, interview, questionnaire, observation, focus groups, questionnaire design, sampling methods)
· Presentation of data using charts, diagrams and graphs.
· Measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode)
· Using word-processing software (e.g. creating tables, using a variety of document templates for reports, minutes, CVs etc., outline numbering, applying styles, automatic tables of contents, referencing, drawing and other toolbars)
· Using spreadsheet software (e.g. using formulae such as min, max, sum, autosum, autofill, function wizard, relative and absolute cell referencing, sorting and filtering data, generating charts from data sets)
· Using presentation software (e.g. slide design, slide masters, importing images, animation)
· Sharing data and objects between software applications
LEARNING AND TEACHING STRATEGY
Issues relating to the concepts and principles associated with study/research skills are suited to delivery during weekly lectures. However, for the exploration of these topics, their application within the students’ studies and practical experience of the business software, computer room workshops/tutorials are the most appropriate strategy. This gives students the opportunity to integrate the theory and practice of study/research skills such as referencing, report writing and questionnaire design/analysis within the business software context. Furthermore, this module will afford students the opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning, to be engaged, independent learners but with the support of their peers.
The allocation of teaching to deliver the module is:
Activity type |
Hours |
Percentage |
||
Scheduled learning |
50 |
25% |
||
Independent learning |
150 |
75% |
||
Placement learning |
||||
TOTAL |
20 0 |
100% |
ASSESSMENT
Students will undertake the first assignment in groups (except in cases of exceptional circumstances) Each group will carry out research (in line with learning objectives 2, 3 and 4) in order to develop their project brief and supporting project pitch. The second assignment requires students to complete an individual report (
30
00 words) that evaluates the masterclasses that take place during the first semester. This evaluative and reflective report will consider how the masterclasses (and supporting literature, theories and frameworks) have impacted the carrying out of the project, as well as the students own personal learning and development. This second assignment allows students an opportunity to address all learning outcomes.
Assessment Component 1 – 25%
Students will (in groups) carry out research using published literature (and if appropriate primary research) in order to develop a project brief. This project brief should include a rationale for the project that is grounded in current and credible literature and / or primary data. The project brief should also include a high level implementation plan for the project that includes timeframes and major milestones, as well as the overarching aims and objectives of the project. The project brief will take the form of a written report and should not exceed 1000 words.
In support of this project brief, students should also prepare a presentation to ‘pitch’ their project idea to a panel of academic staff. This will be a group presentation and should utilise some form of presentation software. The presentation should be a minimum of five minutes, but will not exceed ten minutes. Students should also be prepared to field additional questions from the staff they are presenting to.
Assessment Component 2 – 75%
This assessment requires the student to produce a reflective and evaluative management report (maximum 3000 words). This assessment will provide students an opportunity to utilise all of the skills and techniques that they have developed across the Academic Skills module, as well as put their theoretical knowledge into practice.
Over the course of the first semester, students will attend weekly masterclass sessions that will impact and inform the implementation of their project. The report requires students to reflect on, and evaluate these masterclass sessions in relation to their project, as well as address the current literature that supports the themes and issues discussed during these masterclass sessions. Students should reflect on the impact that the masterclass sessions had on the implementation of their project, as well as consider how these sessions influenced their personal learning and development. As part of this reflection, students should also include recommendations for how they would improve a similar project in future, as well as enhance their own personal skills and competences.
Assessment Summary
Written |
Coursework |
Practical |
EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (ESD)
Does the module contribute to ESD? |
Yes |
The whole module introduces the sustainability in business and management concept. | |
Module themes include social impacts, changing and innovating management practices and case material which will apply to sustainable development. The concept of business incorporated embraces Not For Profit, social enterprises and community enterprises, as well as conventional private enterprise, thereby opening alternative solutions to problems identified. Students will be encouraged to apply Bruntland concepts in a creative manner to recommend a systemic solution incorporating whole society participation. In practical exercises students will be challenged to review impacts on global (therefore UNESCO relevant) and local (therefore the Welsh/local dimension e.g. Future Generations Wales) business practices. Generic and transferable skills will be developed in students for research, team approaches and use of consultation tools, in their problem evaluation and response sessions. Their individual role as agents of change and advocates for sustainable development will be explored in academic discipline training, use for case and stimuli material and in interactive collaborative teaching and assessment delivery. Students from higher levels will be invited to demonstrate higher level skills in support for the module to raise the expectation of achievement and sustainable study and employability opportunities. This module also acts as a stimulus for the following Community Engagement module, which it underpins with contributions for employer, social activists and community project work or volunteering opportunities |
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Essential
Andrews, J. (2010) Jump Right In! Essential Computer Skills Using Microsoft Office 2010, Pearson: Harlow
Cottrell, S. (2013) Study Skills Handbook, 4th Ed., Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke
Wilson, J. (2014) Essentials of Business Research: A Guide to Doing Your Research Project, 2nd Ed Sage: London
Recommended
Cottrell, S. (2010) Skills for Success: The Personal Development Planning Handbook. 2nd Ed. (Palgrave Study Guides), Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke
McMillan, K. & Weyers, J. (2007) The Smarter Student: Study Skills & Strategies for Success at University, Prentice Hall: Harlow
Piscitelli, S.V. (2014) Study Skills: Do I Really Need This Stuff? 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall: Harlow
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2012) Research Methods for Business Students, 6th Edition, FT/Prentice Hall: Harlow. On-line access on 6th Edition
.
Background
Cox, J., Frye C. & Preppernau, J. (2010) Microsoft Office Home and Student 2010 Step by Step Book/CD Package. On-line access only
Journals
International Journal of Educational Development
International Journal of Training & Development
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Computers & Education
Websites
www.skills4study.com/
www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.php
www.palgrave.com/skills4study/
www.ltscotland.org.uk/studyskills/
www.how-to-study.com/
www.brunel.ac.uk/~mastmmg/ssguide/sshome.htm
RESULT
BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION |
Student name: |
Student P number: |
||||||
Programme: |
BA Business, Finance and Management |
||||||
Module: |
Academic Skills |
Module Level (4, 5, 6): |
4 |
||||
Module code: |
M4X01434 |
Contribution to Overall Module Assessment (%): |
25% | ||||
Lecturer: |
Gareth Hughes |
Internal Verifier: |
Beth Cummings |
||||
Assignment Title: |
Project Pitch |
Assignment No (x of x): |
1 of 2 |
||||
Hand Out Date: |
W/C 3rd October 2017 |
Submission deadline: |
30th October 2017 |
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, |
||||
Disclosure: |
I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I have acknowledged all materials used from the published or unpublished works of other people. All references have been duly cited. |
||||
Student’s Signature: |
Assignments will not be accepted without a signature here |
Date: |
Turnitin: Lecturer to tick to indicate if an electronic version of the assignment must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: the Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt for the student. Both electronic and paper versions MUST be submitted by the same deadline. No marks will be released until both submissions are received. Late submission of either the electronic or paper version will result in a late penalty mark. Penalties for late submission: Up to one week late, maximum mark of 40%. Over one week late , Refer. Only Year Tutors and the Programme Director may grant an extension. |
YES |
||
NO |
Learning Outcomes tested (from module syllabus) |
Assessment Criteria To achieve each outcome a student must 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. |
· Source and select a range of literature sources, which may be academic, professional, governmental, and retrieved independently · Analyse the literature · Use literature sources that are relevant, current and credible. · Produce a written report in a suitable format, structured and sectioned appropriately. (in groups) · Present to staff using appropriate presentation software, demonstrating ability to convey information and analysis. · Employ an appropriate system of referencing to evidence research. · Use a range of word processing software features (e.g. e-Referencing, automatic TOC, tables) in the production of the report |
·
TASK DESCRIPTION |
The skills needed for higher education are ultimately gained through studying at that level; they evolve and mature through practice, trial and error, feedback from others and student reflection. This module aims to provide you with the underlying study/research strategies and software skills that can accelerate that learning process. You are encouraged to develop a reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and to take responsibility for your own learning. Such skills promote a deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout the programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the transferable skills desired in the employment context.
Students will (in groups) carry out research using published literature (and if appropriate primary research) in order to develop a project brief. This project brief should include a rationale for the project that is grounded in current and credible literature and / or primary data. The project brief should also include a high level implementation plan for the project that includes timeframes and major milestones, as well as the overarching aims and objectives of the project. The project brief will take the form of a written report and should not exceed 1000 words. Any literature should be relevant, credible and current and sourced from a variety of different resources. The production of the report will require IT skills, secondary research, critical thinking, academic skills such as referencing and report writing conventions.
Each Student will research and prepare no more than 1,000 words on chosen project. The outcome should be ONE management report, incorporating the contributions of each team member (where relevant) and members will also contribute to the collation/structure of the report (for example, the writing of the introduction, conclusion and bibliographic sections).
In support of this project brief, students should also prepare a group presentation to ‘pitch’ their project idea to academic staff. This will be a group presentation and should utilise some form of presentation software. The presentation should be a minimum of five minutes, but will not exceed 10 minutes. Students should also be prepared to field additional questions from the staff they are presenting to.
Students will use PowerPoint (or alternative presentation software) to support your pitch, demonstrating an ability to distil information and convey issues in a clear, concise and professional manner.
Students also should submit copies of presentation slides and any handout materials.
GUIDANCE FOR Students IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS |
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five common assessment criteria overleaf.
1. Research-informed Literature
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set. You should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial; these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks, current news articles, organisational documents, and websites. You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic journals are normally highly credible sources while websites require careful consideration/selection and should be used sparingly. Any sources you use should be current and up-to-date, typically published within the last five years or so, though seminal works in the field may be older. You must provide evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work, using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please use the Harvard referencing system.
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the subject area. Knowledge relates to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through your learning. You demonstrate your understanding by interpreting the meaning of the facts and information (knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc. appropriate to the task(s) set. You should be able to explain the theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your understanding. Your mark/grade will also depend upon the extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed, with comprehensive coverage.
3. Analysis
Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and break information down into parts, make inferences, compile, compare and contrast information. This means not just describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who? Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work. Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data and concepts. Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must be derived from the content of your work. There should be no new information presented within your conclusion. Where relevant, alternative solutions and recommendations may be proposed.
4. Practical Application and Deployment
You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular context. How do they work in practice? You will deploy models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative and creative. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of real world examples and cases, the application of a model within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation against others based on stated criteria. You should show awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when applied in particular contexts.
5. Skills for Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in professional practice. This includes demonstrating your individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report, presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in presentation and organisation.
Essential Resources:
· Resources listed on the lecture schedule and on Moodle
· The student handbook
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.
Page 9 of 19
Common Assessment Criteria Applied |
Marks available |
Marks awarded |
|||||
1. Research-informed Literature Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions. |
|||||||
10 | |||||||
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject |
|||||||
3. Analysis Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence |
|||||||
30 | |||||||
4. Practical Application and Deployment Deployment of methods, materials, tools and techniques; application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems. |
|||||||
20 | |||||||
5. Skills for Professional Practice Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and organisation. |
|||||||
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) |
% |
|||
Up to one-week late |
|||||
Over one week late |
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 research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions mostly consistently applied. |
Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed 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 well established 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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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. |
Student Self Evaluation Form |
|
Year of programme |
|
This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
Page 11 of 19
Level of Achievement |
|||||||||||
REFER |
3rd |
2:2 |
2:1 |
1st |
|||||||
1. Research-informed Literature | 30-39% | ||||||||||
3. Analysis | |||||||||||
4. Practical Application and Deployment | |||||||||||
5. Skills for Professional Practice |
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL |
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS you feel that you need TO DEVELOP |
||
Student’s Name |
Date |
||
Student’s Signature |
RESULT
BA Business and Management |
||
M4X01434
SBUS4108 |
Contribution to Overall Module Assessment (%): |
75% |
Gareth Hughes |
||
Reflective Report |
2 of 2 |
|
2nd March 2018 |
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).
Disclosure:
I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I have acknowledged all materials used from the published or unpublished works of other people. All references have been duly cited.
Student’s Signature:
Assignments will not be accepted without a signature here
Date:
Turnitin: Lecturer to tick to indicate if an electronic version of the assignment must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: the Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt for the student. Both electronic and paper versions MUST be submitted by the same deadline. No marks will be released until both submissions are received. Late submission of either the electronic or paper version will result in a late penalty mark. Penalties for late submission: Up to one week late, maximum mark of 40%. Over one week late, Refer. Only Year Tutors and the Programme Director may grant an extension.
YES
NO
· Attendance of masterclasses is essential and mandatory to meet the learning objectives of this module · Students will need to evaluate and reflect on the masterclasses in relation to their project work (i.e. how these masterclasses impacted and informed the implementation of their project) · Address literature that is related to the themes and issues that are discussed in the masterclasses and compare and contrast this with their own experience during the course of the project. · Employ an appropriate system of referencing to evidence research. · Make recommendations as to how students could improve future project work · Reflect on personal strengths and weaknesses and address how these can be developed and mitigated respectively, in future |
TASK DESCRIPTION
The skills needed for higher education are ultimately gained through studying at that level; they evolve and mature through practice, trial and error, feedback from others and student reflection. This module aims to provide you with the underlying study/research strategies and software skills that can accelerate that learning process. You are encouraged to develop a reflective, active, positive approach to learning, and to take responsibility for your own learning. Such skills promote a deeper understanding of the topics studied throughout the programme; they support lifelong learning, and are the transferable skills desired in the employment context.
This assessment requires the student to produce a reflective and evaluative management report (maximum 3000 words) (N.B this is an individual piece of work). This assessment will provide students an opportunity to utilise all of the skills and techniques that they have developed across the Academic Skills module, as well as put their theoretical knowledge into practice.
Over the course of the first semester, students will attend weekly masterclass sessions that will impact and inform the implementation of their project. The report requires students to reflect on, and evaluate these masterclass sessions in relation to their project, as well as address the current literature that supports the themes and issues discussed during these masterclass sessions. Students should reflect on the impact that the masterclass sessions had on the implementation of their project, as well as consider how these sessions influenced their personal learning and development. As part of this reflection, students should also include recommendations for how they would improve a similar project in future, as well as enhance their own personal skills and competences.
Please note, attendance of masterclass sessions is compulsory and essential to success in this module. Students should ensure that they keep detailed notes during the masterclasses, in order to be able to fully reflect on how these sessions informed and impacted the conduct of their projects. Further to which, students should ensure that they conduct further research around the themes and issues addressed in the masterclasses in order that they can demonstrate both an academic and practical understanding of these issues, as well as understand the broader context in which they sit.
GUIDANCE FOR Students IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five common assessment criteria overleaf.
Research-informed Literature
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set. You should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial; these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks, current news articles, organisational documents, and websites. You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic journals are normally highly credible sources while websites require careful consideration/selection and should be used sparingly. Any sources you use should be current and up-to-date, typically published within the last five years or so, though seminal works in the field may be older. You must provide evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work, using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please use the Harvard referencing system.
Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the subject area. Knowledge relates to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through your learning. You demonstrate your understanding by interpreting the meaning of the facts and information (knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc. appropriate to the task(s) set. You should be able to explain the theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your understanding. Your mark/grade will also depend upon the extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed, with comprehensive coverage.
Analysis
Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and break information down into parts, make inferences, compile, compare and contrast information. This means not just describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who? Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work. Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data and concepts. Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must be derived from the content of your work. There should be no new information presented within your conclusion. Where relevant; alternative solutions and recommendations may be proposed.
Practical Application and Deployment
You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular context. How do they work in practice? You will deploy models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative and creative. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of real world examples and cases, the application of a model within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation against others based on stated criteria. You should show awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when applied in particular contexts.
Skills for Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in professional practice. This includes demonstrating your individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report, presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in presentation and organisation.
Essential Resources:
· Resources listed on the lecture schedule and on Moodle
· The student handbook
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.
Page 16 of 19
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)
%
Up to one-week late
Over one week late
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
Assessment Criteria
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 research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions mostly consistently applied.
Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed 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 well established 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.
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.
Student Self Evaluation Form
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme:
Year of programme
Assignment Title:
This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
Page 19 of 19
Common Assessment Criteria Applied
Level of Achievement
REFER
3rd
2:2
2:1
1st
1st
OUTRIGHT FAIL
UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
GOOD
VERY GOOD
EXCELLENT
EXCEPTIONAL
1. Research-informed Literature
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
3. Analysis
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
4. Practical Application and Deployment
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
5. Skills for Professional Practice
0-29%
30-39%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-79%
80-100%
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS you feel that you need TO DEVELOP
Student’s Name
Date
Student’s Signature