RECENT ASSIGNMENT

LEVEL 7ASSESSMENT SPECIFICATION
Student name:
Student ID number:
Programme: MBA
Module: Research Methodologies
Module code: SBLC7012 Contribution to Overall Module Assessment (%): Component 1 – 50%
Component 2 – 50%
Lecturer: Internal Verifier:
Assignment Title: Business Research Proposal Word count (or equivalent): 5000 - 6000
Submission deadline: 23/03/2019 Return date of provisional marks & written feedback: tba
Submission method: All written assessments, where practical and possible, must be submitted via Turnitin unless otherwise instructed by the Lecturer. (Please DO NOT put this assessment specification into Turnitin or it will match many similarities with other students’ submissions.)
Alternative submission method (if applicable):
Late submission of the assessment will result in a late penalty mark. Penalties for late submission: Up to one-week late, maximum mark of 50%. Over one week late, 0%. Only the Extenuating Circumstances Panel may approve a change to submission dates.
Academic honesty / referencing: Academic honesty is required. In the main body of your submission you must give credit to authors on whose research and ideas your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have used, cited or quoted in order to complete this assessment.

Learning Outcomes tested
(from module descriptor)
Assessment Criteria to achieve each outcome.
A student must demonstrate the ability to:
Undertake, from inception to completion, using appropriate theories, applications, methodologies and evidence, a self-initiated, autonomous and critically comprehensive body of structured research activity which leads to an analysis, synthesis and evaluation of evidence which is sufficient to propose and design a comprehensive Major Project proposal. Literature Evidence Review (Literature and evidence sources) 2500 - 3000 words maximum – weighted 50%
Critically use research methodologies and conventions; formulate research questions, and propose, plan and complete research projects and communicate their findings to a variety of audiences using appropriate theory, media, and approaches towards analysis, syntheses, evaluation, and the formulation of judgements and conclusions based on a body of defined research. Research Design Proposal 2500 – 3000 words maximum – weighted 50%

TASK DESCRIPTION
Assessment of this Module
Assessment Component 1 - 50% Literature-Evidence Review (2500-3000 words maximum)
Assessment Component 2 - 50% Research Design Proposal (2500-3000 words maximum)
All forms of assessment must be submitted by the published deadline which is detailed above. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted – ignorance of the deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non-submission. Any late work will NOT be considered and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question.
You are requested to keep a copy of your work (excluding exams).
The Assignments
Overview of the two assignments
Overall, you are required to create a proposal for a research project aimed at a business-related problem or opportunity. The two components of this proposal are related but separately assessed:
a. You must prepare a Literature Review and Evidence Review on that research proposal, fully referenced.
b. you are required to design that Business Research Proposal.
As explained above there are two integrated parts to this assessment:
• Component 1 – the Literature Evidence Review
• Component 2 – the Research Design Proposal
The topic forming the basis of the research proposal needs to be established in the first three weeks dating from the start of the teaching of the module. Permission to continue will be dependent upon lecturer approval of that topic, shown by the signing of a proforma. Any subsequent changes to that must be approved and signed by the lecturer also.
It has to be stressed that the choice of topic and the proposal is undertaken on an INDIVIDUAL basis.
FAILURE TO ABIDE BY THE TWO ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVE WILL MEAN THAT ANY WORK SUBMITTED WILL BE MARKED AS FAIL.
The research proposal must include a background which describes the basic situation underlying your project. It must include a statement of the problem or opportunity that is the aim of your project. It must describe the rationale for your project, why you wish to carry out this research and the benefits that will accrue from its successful conclusion.
You must create research objectives that, when successfully completed, will have the information that enables you to solve the problem or capitalise on the opportunity that is the aim of your research.
It must also include a literature review that evaluates the context for your research, and sources academic research and models that are relevant to the project. It should include a critical evaluation of relevant theoretical and practical references and include breadth of understanding and depth of critical evaluation. Reviews will require analysis and evaluation of evidence and sources and be informed by theory and appropriate practice.
You must evaluate and fully describe the research methods that will be necessary to successfully complete the research.
Data collection methods must be selected and described which are consistent with the research philosophy necessary for its completion: these can include secondary and/or primary data sources. The methods by which the data you collect will be analysed and need to be justified.
Finally, ethical, validity and reliability issues relevant to the research must be discussed and a time plan for its completion must be calculated and displayed as a Gantt chart (or another suitable format).
Further points:
• It is expected that you use current peer-reviewed journals and articles to ensure that you have an in-depth understanding of your topic particularly for the Literature Review.
• There must be sufficient linkage between theory and practice.
• Harvard style of references should be used.
You must ensure that the research title and research objectives/questions are included in both Components.

TASK DESCRIPTION – ASSIGNMENT Component 1 - 50% Literature-Evidence Review
TASKS/STRUCTURE
This should be an analysis and synthesis of the literature pertaining to your topic. You should ensure that you read up-to-date sources and assess current academic concepts and models relating to that topic and the research question and objectives developed.
[Do not forget to put the RQ and Ros in a separate introduction to this component – this will inform the reader clearly what the LR should be covering. The words used here do not contribute to the 2500-3000 word count].
• Introduction
• Is the domain explained?
• Is there a rationale for the chosen topic?
• Are the main sources stated?
• The Main Body
• Is there a clear structure?
• Does the review flow into a logical progression?
• Does the review convey the thinking of the writer?
• Use of secondary sources, citation, references, synthesis, critique, chronology, seminal works, models?
• Is the current position conveyed?
• Is there a set of emergent conclusions?
• Conclusion
• Is there a clear concluding statement?
• Are there emergent themes?
• Is the literature review conclusive?
• Has the research “gap” been identified?
• Has a theoretical (or conceptual) framework been identified?
LENGTH REQUIRED
2500-3000 words +/- 10%. Any deviation from this will be penalised.
FORMATTING AND LAYOUT
Please note the following when completing your written assignment:
1. Writing: Written in English in an appropriate business/academic style
2. Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment.
3. Length: 2500 – 3000 words
4. Formatting: Typed on A4 paper in Calibri font 12 with at least 2.5 centimetre space at each edge, double spaced and pages numbered.
5. Document format:ensure a clear title, course, and name or ID number is on a cover sheet and a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout is also provided.
6. Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive.
The use of a range of information sources is expected – academic books, peer reviewed journal articles, professional
articles, reliable statistics, company annual reports and other company information. All referencing should be in Harvard style.

TASK DESCRIPTION: Component 2: Research Design Proposal 50%
TASKS/STRUCTURE
• Research Title
• Research Question
• Research Objectives
• A Background to the Research Proposal:
• Is the overall context for the research well established?
• Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective?
• Is there a statement of the problem?
• Is there a rationale for the topic?
• Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched?
• Do the boundaries of the research make sense?
• Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research?
• Are research objectives included which are specific?
• Are the research questions matched to the research objectives?
• Research Methodology – Philosophy, Reasoning, Design and Data collection
• Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal?
• Are all the relevant sections included?
• Is the approach adequately explained – interms of philosophy, strategy, etc.?
• Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task?
• Have the data types been defined and classified?
• Have target populations and samples been defined and justified?
• Data Analysis
• Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the Objectives and the research questions?
• Have analysis methods been specified? In terms of software and types of statistics to be used – descriptive and/or inferential?
• Ethics, Validity and Reliability
• Are validity and reliability issues discussed?
• Are the ethical issues in the project understood and dealt with?
• Are the intended outcomes for the research made known and is there a clear understanding of the value added?
• Gantt Chart (or other suitable format)
LENGTH REQUIRED
2500-3000 words +/- 10%. Any deviation from this will be penalised.
FORMATTING AND LAYOUT
Please note the following when completing your written assignment:
1 Writing: Written in English in an appropriate business/academic style
2 Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment.
3 Length: 2500 – 3000 words
4 Formatting: Typed on A4 paper in Calibri font 12 with at least 2.5 centimetre space at each edge, double spaced and pages numbered.
5 Document format:see earlier advice
6 Ensure a clear title, course, and name or ID number is on a cover sheet and a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout is also provided.
7 Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive.
The use of a range of information sources is expected – academic books, peer reviewed journal articles, professional articles, reliable statistics, company annual reports and other company information. All referencing should be in Harvard style.

GUIDANCEFOR STUDENTS IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five generic assessment criteria overleaf.
1. Engagement with Literature Skills
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set; you should make use of scholarly reviews and primary sources, as appropriate (for example, refereed research articles and/or original materials appropriate to the discipline). 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, mostly published within the last five years or so, though seminal/important works in the field may be older. You must provide evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work, using correctly a suitable referencing system, including in-text citations in the main body of your work and a reference list at the end of your work.
Guidance specific to this assessment:
Component 1: Students are expected to critically review the relevant literature pertaining to their selected research topic and specific research question. This Literature should be derived from credible and current sources. Harvard Referencing conventions are expected to be followed. (30 marks)
Component 2: Students are expected to demonstrate that their Research Design proposals have sound academic groundings – both in the Introduction (for the selected topic) and their Research Design (for their selected methodology and method(s). Harvard Referencing conventions are expected to be followed. (10 marks)
2. Knowledge and Understanding Skills
At level 7, you should be able to demonstrate asystematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of your academic discipline, field of study or area of professional practice, with a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to your own research or advanced scholarship. Your work must demonstrate your growing mastery of these concepts, principles, current challenges, innovation and insights 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 contemporary 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.
Guidance specific to this assessment:
Component 1: Students are expected to demonstrate an understanding of the main models and theories pertaining to the selected research topic. (25 marks)
Component 2: Students are expected to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of both the principal methodologies associated with research, and the main methods used in Business Research. (25 marks)
3. Cognitive and Intellectual Skills
You should be able to:evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline; evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses; deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively to make sound judgements in the absence of complete data. 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 what cost? At all times, you must provide justification for your arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected upon the ideas of experts within the subject area is crucial to you providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work. Your choice of methodologies to gather data and information must be rigorously defended. Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data and concepts. Sound, valid, persuasive conclusions are necessary and must be derived from the content of your work. Where relevant, alternative solutions and recommendations may be proposed.
Guidance specific to this assessment:
Component 1: Students are expected to organise the material in the Literature Review such that it contains analysis, synthesis and evaluation. In this context, schools of thought may be identified, key themes outlined, and other means of demonstrating good organisation of the material demonstrated. (25 marks)
Component 2: Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to select and justify both a methodology and methods appropriate to their research question(s). (30 marks)
4. Practical Skills
At level 7, you should be able to demonstrate originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding ofhow established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpretknowledge in the discipline.This includes acting autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level, originality in tackling and solving problems, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable contexts or situations.
You should be able to demonstrate mastery of the leading-edgesubject-related concepts and ideas as they relate to real world situations and/or particular contexts. How do they work in practice? You will deploy models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in those contexts or circumstances, to assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or plausible, justifiable recommendations to solve problems, or to propose new models, or to create artefacts, which may be innovative and creative, thereby demonstrating your understanding ofhow the boundaries of knowledge are advanced through research and/or application. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of real world artefacts, examples and cases, the application of a model within an organisation and/or benchmarking one theory or organisation against others.
Guidance specific to this assessment:
Component 1: Students are expected, in this aspect of the work, to relate what is being learned in the Literature Review to the actual undertaking of the forthcoming research, primarily through the development of a conceptual (or theoretical) framework. (10 marks)
Component 2: Students are expected to produce a research design which is appropriate to the topic, question(s) and context of the proposed research. As such an analysis of the data collection and data analysis methods are paramount. Aspects such as ethics, validity and reliability, and resource issues will also need to be considered. (25 marks)
5. Transferable Skills for Life and Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the qualities and transferable skills necessary for postgraduate-level employment in circumstances requiring sound judgement, personal responsibility and initiative in complex and unpredictable professional environments. This includes demonstrating:the independent learning ability for continuing professional development to advance existing skills and acquire new competences of a professional nature that will enable you to assume significant responsibility within organisations; that you can initiate and complete tasks, projects and procedures, whether individually and/or collaboratively, to a professional level; that you can use appropriate media to effectively communicate information, arguments and analysis in a variety of forms for a variety of audiences; fluency of expression; clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in presentation and organisation.
Guidance specific to this assessment:
Component 1: Students are expected to communicate and present the Literature Review effectively. (10 marks)
Component 2: Students are expected to communicate and present the Research Design effectively. (10 marks)

STUDENT FEEDBACK FORM- COMPONENT 1
This section details the extent to which the assessment criteria are demonstrated by you, whichin turn determines your mark. The marks available for each category of skill 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.
Generic Assessment Criteria Marks available Marks
awarded
1. Engagement with Literature Skills
. 30
2. Knowledge and Understanding Skills
25
3. Cognitive and Intellectual Skills
25
4. Practical Application Skills
10
5. Transferable Skills for Life and Professional Practice
10
Assessment 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 1 week late (40% Max)
Over 1 week late (0%)
STUDENT FEEDBACK FORM COMPONENT 2
This section details the extent to which the assessment criteria are demonstrated by you, which in turn determines your mark. The marks available for each category of skill 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.
If marked via Turnitin the criteria below will form the basis of the assessment via either a Rubric or Grading Form.
Generic Assessment Criteria Marks available Marks
awarded
1. Engagement with Literature Skills
. 10
2. Knowledge and Understanding Skills
25
3. Cognitive and Intellectual Skills
30
4. Practical Application Skills
25
5. Transferable Skills for Life and Professional Practice
10
Assessment 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 1 week late (40% Max)
Over 1 week late (0%)
GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Level 7
In accordance with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, at the end of Level 7 students should be able to demonstrate: a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline or area of professional practice; a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship; originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline; conceptual understanding that enables the student to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses. They will be able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences. They will demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level to continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level. They the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility; decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations/professional environments; and the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.
Level 7 FAIL FAIL MARGINAL FAIL SATISFACTORY
(Pass) GOOD to VERY GOOD
(Merit) EXCELLENT
(Distinction) EXCEPTIONAL
(Distinction)
Category 0-29% 30-44% 45-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-84% 85-100%
Engagement with literature (including current research, referencing,
academic conventions and
academic honesty) Little or no evidence of reading and/or reliance on inappropriate sources.
Views and findings mostly unsupported and non-authoritative.
Referencing conventions used incoherently or largely absent. Poor engagement with essential reading. No evidence of wider reading. Reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Heavily reliant on information gained through class contact. Inconsistent and weak use of referencing. Engagement with a very limited range of relevant and credible sources. Some omissions and minor errors.
Referencing conventions evident though not always applied accurately or consistently. Engagement with an appropriate range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Some over-reliance on texts. Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies. Engagement with a wide range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently.
Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of referencing, with no/very few inaccuracies or inconsistencies. Engagement with an extensive range of relevant and credible literature, informed by the latest research. Consistently accurate application of referencing. Exceptional engagement with an extensive range of relevant and credible literature, informed by the latest research. High-level referencing skills consistently and professionally applied.
Knowledge and understanding (A systematic, conceptual understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of the discipline; a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research)
Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of the subject matter is not systematic. Substantial inaccuracies. No awareness of current problems, insights or the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.
Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial systematic understanding. Some significant inaccuracies and/or irrelevant material. No critical awareness of current problems, insights, or latest research within the discipline. Limited knowledge and systematic understanding of the concepts and principles within the subject area, which to some marginal extent, is informed by current research and scholarship. Some critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, but often under-developed. Knowledge is accurate and reasonably detailed. A systematic understanding of the field of study informed by, to some extent, current research and scholarship, A critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights though this may be under-developed occasionally. Knowledge has a well-defined focus, which is reasonably extensive, coherent and detailed, with a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights. Exhibits good understanding of the breadth and depth of contemporary and established views, and the work is, at least in part, well-informed by current research and scholarship. Excellent mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge. A systematic, excellent understanding of the concepts of the subject informed by current research and scholarship. Highly critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights. A critical, awareness of how the boundaries of knowledge are advanced through research.
Exceptional mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge. An exceptionally critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights. An outstanding understanding of the concepts of the subject, well-informed by current research and scholarship. A critical, sophisticated and nuanced awareness of how the boundaries of knowledge are advanced through research.
Cognitiveand intellectual skills
(Critical evaluation of current research and methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses; make sound judgements in the absence of complete data.) Wholly or almost wholly descriptive work. Little or no evaluation or critique or attempt at a systematic approach.
Failure to develop arguments, leading to illogical or invalid judgements. Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of credible evidence.
Largely descriptive work, with superficial use of critical evaluation of research and methodologies. Absent or weak development of hypotheses and judgements. Information accepted uncritically, uses generalised statements made with scant evidence and unsubstantiated opinions. Ideas sometimes illogical and contradictory. Limited attempt at critical evaluation/ critique of current research and methodologies, tending towards description.
Limited attempt to propose new hypotheses. Can deal with complex issues but not systematically or creatively. Some evidence to support emerging judgements but these may be underdeveloped or with a little inconsistency / mis-interpretation.
May assert rather than argue a case.
Some critical evaluation/ critique of current research and methodologies, though slightly underdeveloped in places, Proposes adequate but limited new hypotheses, where relevant. Can deal with complex issues but not fully systematically or creatively. Ability to make judgements based on data (that may be incomplete) but with some tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of reason and evidence. Sound critical evaluation/ critique of current research and methodologies, Proposes new hypotheses, where appropriate. Can deal with complex issues systematically and with some creativity. Ability to make sound judgements based on data (that may be incomplete)
Excellent critical evaluation/ critique of current research and methodologies, Proposes innovative hypotheses, where appropriate. Can synthesise complex issues systematically and creatively. Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated judgements.
Exceptional critical evaluation/ critique of current research and methodologies, Proposes innovative hypotheses, where appropriate. Exemplary systematic and creative synthesis of complex issues.
Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated, nuanced, judgements. Potential for journal publication or doctoral research.
Practical skills
(Originality / creativity in the application of knowledge, tools and techniques and in tackling and solving problems in complex and unpredictable professional situations; practical use of established techniques of research and enquiry to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline.) Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.
Limited understanding of the application of theory to practice or making appropriate links between the two.
Very weak problem-solving skills in complex and unpredictable contexts. Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed appreciation of the context of the application.
Weak understanding of the application of theory to practice, with only occasional evidence of making appropriate links between the two. Weak problem-solving skills in complex and unpredictable contexts.
An awareness and mostly appropriate application of well-established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques, with occasional errors.
Basic appreciation of the context of the application. Theoretical knowledge and understanding applied in practice, but not always making logical links between the two.
Can identify problems and propose basic solutions without fully appreciating the complexity of unpredictable contexts. An appropriate application of standard methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Clear appreciation of the context of the application. Mainly consistent, accurate and logical application of theory to practice, making appropriate links between the two.
Can identify problems and propose mostly appropriate solutions in complex and unpredictable contexts, with elements of originality. 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 insights. Can identify problems and propose appropriate solutions in complex and unpredictable contexts.
Evidence of originality and creativity. An advanced application of knowledge, methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
The context of the application is well considered, and insightful.
Can identify complex problems and propose excellent solutions. An excellent grasp of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship.
Shows originality in application of knowledge and techniques, and of how established techniques of enquiry create and interpret knowledge in the discipline. Exceptional application skills in complex, unpredictable, contexts, drawing skilfully on the latest research within the discipline. Can identify complex problems and propose sophisticated, original solutions.
An outstanding application of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship.
Shows originality in application of knowledge and techniques, and of how established techniques of enquiry create and interpret knowledge in the discipline with assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and techniques.
Transferable skills for life and professional practice
(Exercise of self-direction, autonomy and personal responsibility; plan and implement tasks at a professional level; independent learning; use appropriate media to communicate effectively and professionally to a variety of audiences; fluency of expression; systematic approach; clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation.) Communication medium is inappropriate or misapplied.
Work is poorly structured, disorganised and/or confusingly expressed. Very weak use of language and/or very inappropriate style. Little or no evidence of autonomy (or collaboration, where relevant) in the completion of tasks. Little or no evidence of the skills required in professional, postgraduate employment.
Communication medium is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.
Work is poorly presented in a disjointed manner. It is loosely, and at times incoherently, structured, with information and ideas often poorly expressed. Weak use of language and/or inappropriate style. Weak independent initiative (or collaboration, if relevant). Limited evidence of the skills required in professional, postgraduate employment. Can communicate in a suitable medium but with some room for improvement.
Mostly ordered presentation and structure in which relevant ideas / concepts are reasonably expressed. Work may lack coherence in places. Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in group activities.
Demonstrates some but not all of the basic skills required in professional, postgraduate employment, with some areas of minor weakness. Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have minor errors.
Mostly coherent, organised work, in a suitable structure and is for the most part clearly expressed. Can work effectively independently and/or as part of a team, with clear contribution to group activities.
Demonstrates the skills required in professional, postgraduate employment, with some areas of strength and some of minor weakness. Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a suitable format.
Work is coherent, fluent, well-structured and organised. Can work very well autonomously and/or as part of a team, with a good contribution to group activities.
Demonstrates comprehensive professional, postgraduate employment skills. Can communicate professionally confidently and consistently in a suitable format.
Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally. Can work autonomously with initiative. Where relevant can work professionally within a team, showing leadership skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting obligations. Demonstrates excellent professional, postgraduate employment skills and a strong appetite for further development.
Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of professionalism.
Work is remarkably coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally. Can work outstandingly well and professionally within a team, showing advanced leadership skills. Demonstrates exemplary professional, postgraduate employment skills and a strong appetite for further development.