Examine a given situation with a view to identifying an appropriate research question and associated research objectives. Select and rationalise an appropriate research methodology and design.

Distinction: ≥70%

  Merit: 60-69%

 Pass: 50-59%

Fail: below 50%

Knowledge and understanding

The assessment demonstrates that an excellent knowledge of the topic(s) has been gained from careful literature

research and wide-ranging reading that goes beyond

essential recommendations.

There is evidence of considerable independent

research related to the case study, and this is supported

A sound understanding of the main concepts covered by the unit is demonstrated. Key issues/debates are identified and discussed.

There is evidence of independent research and is supported with appropriate sources.

The approach demonstrates some engagement with the critical perspectives

A basic level of understanding of the concepts and issues covered by the course, but with some gaps or

misunderstanding.

There is evidence of some independent research but this tends to be lacking support,

An inadequate level of

understanding of the concepts and issues is evident. The

selection of ideas is not appropriate, and the discussion remains at a basic

level as a result. Few essential issues are identified and

analysed, and there is evidence of substantial misunderstanding.

Little evidence of

engagement with theory

with appropriate sources.

The approach demonstrates

clear engagement with critical perspectives highlighted on

the unit, and an appreciation of the complexity and diversity of the discipline.

highlighted on the unit, and an appreciation of the complexity and diversity of the discipline.

and critical appreciation of the sources of information.

The approach adheres to a mainstream perspective, with little engagement with critical aspects of the unit.

and the approach adheres to a mainstream perspective, which fails to address the critical aspects of the unit.

Analysis and approach

Coverage and selection of

The assignment brief is

An appropriate response to

The assignment does not

the content is excellent, and

addressed comprehensively,

the assessment brief and all

meet expectations of

it is a highly appropriate

and a convincing and

aspects of the task have

appropriateness as a

response to the assignment

coherent line of reasoning is

been addressed. A

response to the task set. It

brief. A clear and creative

maintained. There is a very

reasonable level of content

needs to address the topic

ability to describe, analyse,

good coverage of content

has been covered and the

more explicitly and

and synthesise ideas is

and evidence of good critical

ability to analyse concepts

analytically. There is little

demonstrated. There is

evaluation of relevant theory

and think critically is evident

evidence of a critical

evidence of critical

and research. Main points

although not fully developed.

perspective in relation to the

appreciation of relevant

are sound and substantial.

Argument is weakened by

ideas focused upon, and

theory and research.

occasional confusion or

the whole remains largely

Arguments are sound and

flaws.

descriptive. No discernible

substantial, with elements

arguments are presented,

of originality.

or they are flawed or confused.

Organisation and structure

The assignment is internally consistent, coherent, concise, and well structured. The introduction is well focused and provides a clear indication of the rationale, key literature base used and organisation of the work. The conclusion draws insights that are

logically developed from the analysis.

The structure of the assignment is sound. The introduction is

well focused and highlights relevant literature, a central argument and overall

organisation. The conclusion summarises the issues and

implications.

Effectively structured, although more careful editing would

have improved the overall conciseness of the work. The introduction could more clearly state the rationale, theoretical basis, or outline of the overall

structure of the assignment.

The conclusion provides a summary of the discussion, although there may be

limitations in the significance of outcomes.

There is little effective

organisation of ideas in the

assignment. The introduction has not been related

sufficiently well to the assignment. The lack of

analysis of the company in the assignment results in a lack of insight in relation to outcome. The conclusion lacks focus and insight.

   Use of sources

The selection, interpretation, comparison, evaluation, and integration of material from sources is extremely

effective and demonstrates

Overall, there is a very good selection and use of sources, which are well integrated, interpreted and evaluated,

The scope of sources is

generally relevant although

limited. There is a low level of critical evaluation, or some

There is an inadequate and uncritical use of essential

literature sources, and some sources may not be

personal research, and with full critical awareness of

their status and relevance.

demonstrating some critical awareness of their status and relevance.

significant sources are missing.

relevant to the topic.

Style and presentation

The writing has a consistent and clear style that is highly appropriate. There is evidence of careful editing and

proofreading. The layout of the assignment conforms to

expectations and the length is consistent with requirements.

Referencing is accurate, consistent, and appropriate, and conforms exactly to recommended conventions.

The assignment is concise and easy to read and conforms well to style conventions. It has

been well edited and

proofread. The layout of the

assignment conforms very well to expectations and the length is consistent with

requirements.

Referencing is generally accurate, consistent, and

appropriate although there are errors.

The style of writing is appropriate although it

presents some comprehension difficulties. The assignment is not as concisely written as it might have been, although

layout conforms to expectations and the length meets

requirements. Referencing is inaccurate and in