|
Fail |
Fail |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
|
0-34
(F)
Fail |
35-39
E
Marginal
fail |
40-49
(D)
|
50-59
(C)
|
60-69
(B)
|
70-79
(A)
|
80-100
(A+)
|
|
Not successful |
Below required standard |
Satisfactory |
Good |
Very Good |
Excellent |
Outstanding |
Research /
Evidence-based writing 20% |
There is little or no evidence of
reading of academic texts or the
utilisation of key secondary sources
There is
little or no evidence of wider
reading.
No sources
used in the report.
|
There is limited evidence of reading of
the academic texts or the utilisation
of key secondary sources.
Wider reading lacks relevance.
The sources
chosen are not suitable for use in University/Higher Education.
1-2 sources used in the report |
Evidence of reading largely restricted
to one academic texts and only partially integrated.
Some
utilisation of recommended key secondary sources.
Wider reading is relevant but limited
and only partially integrated.
Several of the
sources chosen are not suitable for use in University/Higher Education.
3-4 sources used in the report |
Wider reading of several core texts and
this has clearly enhanced the work.
Utilisation
of key secondary sources noted.
Wider reading is relevant and only
partially integrated.
The majority
of the sources chosen are suitable for use in University/Higher
Education.
5 -6 sources utilised in the report |
Wider reading shows a range of sources
being used and applied, some of which are independently selected.
Reference to
key academic texts and the utilisation of key secondary sources noted.
Wider reading is relevant and integrated.
All the
sources chosen are suitable for use in University/Higher Education.
7-8 sources utilised in the report |
Application of wider independent
reading is fully evident in the work.
Effective
reference to key academic texts and the utilisation of key secondary sources
noted.
Wider reading is relevant and fully
integrated.
All the
sources chosen are suitable for use in University/Higher Education.
9-10 sources utilised in the report. |
Application of extensive independent
reading is evident throughout the work.
Highly
effective reference to key academic texts and the utilisation of key
secondary sources noted.
Wider reading is relevant and fully
integrated.
All the
sources chosen are suitable for use in University/Higher Education.
10+ sources utilised in the report. |
| Analysis of Challenges 20%
Evidenced by attendance at the
Challenges.
For 3 challenges, then the maximum mark would be
15.
For 2
challenges, a maximum of 10 marks
For only one
challenge then a maximum of 5 marks.
|
Work demonstrates a limited or no
ability to develop lines of argument to analyse the business aspects involved
in the challenges |
Work demonstrates an insufficient
ability to develop lines of argument to analyse the business aspects involved
in the challenges |
Work demonstrates a sufficient ability
to develop lines of argument
to analyse the business aspects
involved in the challenges |
Work demonstrates developed lines of
argument to analyse the business aspects involved in the challenges |
Work demonstrates well-developed lines
of argument to analyse the business aspects involved in the challenges
|
Work demonstrates highly accomplished
development of lines of argument to analyse the business aspects involved in the
challenges |
Work demonstrates highly accomplished
development of lines of argument and independent judgements made
In the analysis of the business aspects
involved in the challenges.
|
| Analysis of skills 20%
A reflection on the skills demonstrated
during the challenges
ie. Communication Skills/ Emotional
Intelligence, Team work, Time Management
and meeting skills and Business skills
and competencies developed. |
Work demonstrates a limited or no
ability to develop lines of argument to analyse and reflect on the skill
demonstrated through the challenges.
No support for the analysis noted by
reference to core module materials.eg Tuckman, Belbin and Goleman |
Work demonstrates an insufficient
ability to develop lines of argument to analyse and reflect on the skills
demonstrated during the Challenges.
No support for the analysis noted by
reference to core module materials eg Tuckman ,Belbin and Goleman . |
Work demonstrates a sufficient ability
to develop lines of argument to analyse and reflect on the skills
demonstrated during the Challenges.
Limited use of key models and concepts
from the module materials to support the analysis.
|
Work demonstrates developed lines of
argument to analyse and reflect on the skills demonstrated during the
Challenges.
Some use of key models and concepts
from the module materials to support the analysis noted.
|
Work demonstrates well-developed lines
of argument to analyse and reflect on the skills demonstrated during the
Challenges.
Good use of key models and concepts
from the module materials to support the analysis noted |
Work demonstrates highly accomplished
development of lines of argument to analyse and reflect on the skills
demonstrated during the Challenges.
Very good use of key models and
concepts from the module materials to support the analysis noted |
Work demonstrates highly accomplished
development of lines of argument and independent judgements made
In the analysis and reflect on the
skills demonstrated during the Challenges.
Excellent use of key models and
concepts from the module materials to support the analysis noted |
| Action Plan 10% |
No action plan included or one nonspecific
action point noted which is not SMART in approach and does not reflect the
development needs identified by the self reflection of skills. |
Several unspecific action points noted
which are not SMART in approach and do not reflect the development needs identified
by the self reflection of skills. |
Several action points noted but only one or two are SMART in approach
but are relevant to the development needs identified in the self reflection
of skills.
|
3 action points noted which are SMART
in approach. |
4 action points noted which are SMART
in approach |
5 action points noted which are SMART
in approach |
5+ action points noted which are SMART
in approach |
|
Literacy Skills 10%
|
No evidence of any attempt to edit into
a cohesive document. Poor literacy skills.
|
Weak editing in the final report. Major
problems with literacy skills |
Fair editing in the final report.
Consistent problems with literacy skills. |
Good editing in the final report. Minor
problems with literacy skills. |
Very good editing in the final report.
Minor problems with literacy skills. |
Excellent editing in the final report.
No problems with literacy skills in any section. |
Outstanding editing in the final
report. No problems with literacy skills in any section. |
| Referencing 10% |
No
attempt at referencing
|
Major errors notedin the application of the
rules of Harvard referencing missing or inaccurate reference list.
Only onecitation formats utilised for example web
only.
|
Parts of
work adheres to rules of Harvard referencing missing or inaccurate reference
list.
A limited
diversity of citation formats utilised
|
Mostly
adheres to rules of Harvard referencing in text and in reference list.
A good
diversity of citation formats utilised
.
|
Very good adherence to rules of Harvard
referencing in text and in reference list.
A very good
diversity of citation formats utilised
|
Excellent
adherence to rules of Harvard referencing in text and in reference list.
An excellent
diversity of citation formats utilised
|
Perfect or
almost perfect adherence to rules of Harvard Referencing in text and in
reference list.
An
outstanding diversity of citation formats utilised
|
