Assessment Criteria

Suggested word limit:       1000 words (±10%)

Component Weighting:     20%

Due Date:                            5pm Friday Week 6

Submission format:       Soft copy of a Word.docx to be uploaded on Blackboard through ‘Assignments and due dates’ menu

Important Please note:

1) Any assignments where plagiarism or collusion is detected will be awarded a mark of zero. You will need to contact your tutor if you wish to discuss

 

2) Failure to upload the correct document or format to the assessment link will result in late penalties being applied to documents which are later submitted for marking of that assignment.

 

3) SafeAssign takes at least 24 hours to return a report. If you wish to check your assignment prior to submission, please allow plenty of time to use the self-check before the final submission deadline arrives; SafeAssign not returning a self-check report WILL NOT be considered a valid reason for an extension. 

 

Assessment Description  

For weeks 3, 4 and 5, e-Learning materials have been uploaded to Blackboard (see ‘E-learning Activities’ menu for these weekly activities) for review and application.

Based on the online clips and the theories they cover, critically evaluate their relevance to the Higher Education industry over the past 30 years. To support your evaluation, for each clip provide specific examples of organisations in the HE Industry which have been successful in their application of these theories, and others who have not.

Recommended Structure 

For each theory (300 words): 

  • Provide a brief description of the theory and its relevance to the HE Sector.
  • Provide an example of where an organisation/institution has successfully adopted a strategy aligned to that particular clip and an example of where an organisation has not been successful, missed an opportunity or would have benefitted from taking a different
  • Your report requires an introduction and conclusion

Assessment Guidelines

Students should consult the marking rubric (see below) to see exactly what is required and how your assignment will be marked.

You should enrich this assignment with ideas from other materials such as journal articles. This additional research will be necessary to obtain the best marks.

All ideas in the report must be referenced using Harvard Referencing (in- text citations and full references at the back).

Group Report
  Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Application of selected theory to industry sector and evidence of synthesis (8 marks) No evidence of any synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples Limited evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or

examples

Some evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or

examples within defined

context

Clear evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples within context. Contextual issues have been identified and discussed Clear evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples within context. Contextual issues have been identified, discussed and critically evaluated
Quality of argument / Use of theory with examples (6 marks) No justification of opinions or position taken. Unsupported by theory and/or examples. Limited argument supported by seminal theory and/or examples Clear argument supported

by relevant theories. Examples used to support

and explore argument

Clear, balanced argument supported by a broad range of relevant theories. Theories and examples evaluated and selection justified Clear, balanced evaluative argument supported by a broad range of relevant theories.

Theories and examples

critically evaluated and selection justified

Quality and justification of conclusions

(2 marks)

No conclusion or conclusion unsupported by argument Safe and predictable conclusions that answer the question. Some evidence of original thought and insight. Good evidence of original thought and insight.

Introduction of innovative models /theories

Good evidence of original thought and insight.

Development and evaluation of innovative models

/theories

Quantity and quality and presentation of references using Harvard Referencing throughout including in-text citations

(2 marks)

Only 0, 1 or 2 relevant references given.

Referencing is unclear.

At least 3 relevant references.

Referencing mostly clear but inconsistent.

At least 5 relevant references given, mainly drawn from provided sources e.g lectures. Clear systematic referencing of all sources.

throughout the report.

At least 7 relevant references including at least 5 from own research including page no’s for all articles Bibliography includes at least 10 relevant references from good sources i.e. journals rather than internet/social media. Very clearly presented.
Professional Report Formatting, Structure and approach

(2 marks)

Poorly presented, no apparent structure and/or confused writing style Limited attempt at formatting, Well structured, clear writing style Page numbering, front cover, bibliography with some attempt at formatting. Well structured, focus

explicit and clear, style appropriate

Good attempt at report formatting incorporating all elements at credits level. Clear focus, structure and style used to emphasise discussion

Excellent attempt at formatting report. Focus clear and justified, structure and style used to emphasise argument and discussion

 

 

Related posts: