Main Objective of the assessment
This is an individual assignment. You are required to submit a critical analysis of research topic in relation to
a chosen topic of study/area of interest in the
context of Business Studies. This research topic normally relates the research issues in your master
programme subject area.
Description of the Assessment
You need to undertake a significant literature review, which outlines the underpinning methodologies and the
research method(s) adopted in previous
research that incorporates a range of viewpoints and perspectives. It is essential to provide a critical analysis
that applies the knowledge and understanding
acquired during the module to evaluate theoretical and technical aspects of related research methodologies
and methods.
You are expected to demonstrate both breadth and depth of understanding of relevant academic literature of
the chosen topic. You are required to explain,
discuss and evaluate the methodologies applied in the reviewed literature.
Typically, your essay should have (a) an executive summary (b) Introduction (c) literature review (d)
Analysis, discussion and evaluation of research
methodology (e) Findings and what you have learnt from this assignment (f) References (Harvard
Referencing System).
In this individual assignment, you are expected to use relevant materials from academic research books and academic empirical journal articles (ABS ranking listed journals) in your subject area to support your analysis and arguments when formulating your assignment. Your analysis, discussion and
evaluation should be backed with appropriate academic references and examples where necessary.
This assignment should be presented with 12 pt. Times New Roman Text with line spacing of 1.5. The word limit is 2000 words (excluding references). Note
that assignment below this word limit by more than 10% would result in decrease in the overall achieved mark by 10%. Proper referencing of all ideas,
concepts, theories and quotes used in your work is essential. Normally you are required to present no less than 15 academic journal article references. The
Harvard referencing system must be used, details of which are contained on your handbook. Failure to employ a clear and appropriate system of
referencing will be penalised.
An example under development (for MG5547 Marketing Communications)
5 marking criteria all equally weighted
Criterion Grade descriptors according to: Content appropriateness of material, relevance, feasibility, quality of solutions
Knowledge
(15%)
Evidence of
reading in the area
of Research
Methods and the
relevant topic
understudy
A* to AExcellent,
Comprehensive,
detailed and well
organised and
structured review of
selected factual
information on the
topic understudy, with
correct emphasis on
the question at hand.
Evidence of reading of
a wide range of
relevant literature
sources including
effective use of the
reading list. Makes
very good use of
factual evidence to
support arguments.
Well sustained
effective style of
writing that is
appropriately concise
or expansive. Accurate
Referencing
B+ to BVery good, relevant
evaluation, detailed
and well organised
response. Good
overview of the
topic understudy,
and the use of
factual information
to address the
question at hand,
which is consistent
and mainly error
free. Evidence of
effective use of the
reading list with
some evidence of
wider reading.
Competent
English and fluent
writing.
Good referencing
C+ to CFair range of
information and use
of terminology but
not complete and/or
some errors. Limited
evidence of the topic
understudy, from
relevant reading in
the area of the topic
understudy,
including the
reading list and/or
course notes. Few
grammatical errors.
Limited, but
adequate
referencing
D+ to DMainly descriptive
answer, satisfactory
but not complete.
Evidence of some
reading, but little
real research effort
is shown. Some
barely adequate
references not well
presented and not
consistent. Lack of
knowledge in some
areas of the topic
understudy, relevant
to the question at
hand and some
factual errors.
English is adequate
E+ to EWork does not
demonstrate
evidence of
understanding the
question at hand
and/or the wider
general aspects of
the topic
understudy.
Limited information
and content, many
factual errors,
and/or little
evidence of
reading.
F
Little or no
adequate content
relating to the
topic understudy,
few relevant
facts, and/or
major factual
errors, too short
and no evidence
of reading