Assessment Pack contents

 

 

XGBSHN3103 Project

Assessment Pack contents:

Short introduction to the task.

Key terms

Key resources

Template to outline structure and content

Rubric to understand marking criteria

Short introduction to the task:

This project has clear sections:

A rationale and plan

Information from websites

Information from books

Information from journal articles

A reflection on the project and summary of findings

 

Key Resources:

A video that explains how to access LTU library:

https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fleedstrinity.cloud.panopto.eu%2FPanopto%2FPages%2FViewer.aspx%3Fid%3D4af7d771-05d7-4ae7-9115-ad86008cd512&data=04%7C01%7Calee%40globalbanking.ac.uk%7C0cbdfaa73e474f2b443308d978ff19ed%7Ce8549c2e0d2e456095913186755fc587%7C0%7C0%7C637673859304201107%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=64xTnuIlS8%2BWo7sO6eRUDt3k4yRukdTpIfoRhnox0Hc%3D&reserved=0

Template:

1. Rationale: What topic have you chosen and why is it relevant (500 words)

Outline the topic

Explain which group of individuals are most affected by this issue and what are some of the challenges

What needs to be understood about the topic – Cause? Effect? Solution?

2. Information from websites (750)

Name of the website
Why is it a good website for research in this area?
What interesting information did it give you about the topic?
What information did it not help you with and what information will you look for next?

1

 
 

2

3
 

 

3 Information from books (500 words)

 

 

Name of book
Why does it appear to be relevant to your topic
What interesting information did it give you about the topic?
What information did it not help you with and what information will you look for next?

1

2

 

4. Information from journal articles (750 words)

Title of systematic review
What were the main findings of the paper
What did the paper tell you that you didn’t know before?
How are the two papers similar/different from each other?

1.

2.

Title of intervention paper
What were the main findings of the paper
What did the paper tell you that you didn’t know before?
How are the two papers similar/different from each other?

1.

2.

5. Reflection on the project

– What do you know about the topic now that you didn’t know at the start (100 words)

– What are the benefits and limitations of websites as sources of information (100 words)

– What are the benefits and limitations of books as sources of information (100 words)

– What is the benefit and the challenge of using journal articles (100 words)

Conclusion

Summarize your findings. (100 words)

 

Remember to do a front page

Remember to Proof-read your work to avoid SPAG errors (Spelling, punctuation and Grammar)

Remember to Align your work, space it with 1.5 spacing.

Remember to reference your work using APA 7th Referencing style

Remember to use the same font size at least 12 Arial or Times Roman.

Rubric used to mark:

Classification

Criterion

Exceptional 1st

Distinction

98, 95, 92

Outstanding

1st

Distinction

88, 85, 82

Excellent

1st

Distinction

78, 75, 72

Very Good

2.1

Merit

68, 65, 62

Good

2.2

Pass

58, 55, 52

Acceptable

3rd

Pass

48, 45, 42

Unacceptable

Fail

38, 35, 32

Unacceptable

Clear Fail

25, 20, 10, 0

Introductory knowledge and understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s)

40%

Exceptional knowledge of subject, demonstrating detailed, in depth and highly confident understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles.
Outstanding knowledge of subject, demonstrating detailed and highly confident

understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles.

Excellent knowledge of subject. demonstrating highly confident

understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles.

Very good knowledge of subject showing confident, understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles.

Good knowledge and understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles. Some minor flaws evident.
Simple factual approach, showing broadly accurate knowledge and understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles, but lacking depth and breadth. Some elements missing and flaws evident.
Unsatisfactory shows a limited grasp of understanding in the subject. Gaps in knowledge and superficial understanding with some inaccuracies.
No answer or an answer which demonstrates major gaps in knowledge and understanding. Significant inaccuracies.

Structure, Argument

10%

Exceptionally well-organised structure, which develops flow and progression in a well-structured and relevant argument. Exceptional articulation of argument/

discussion.

Outstanding structure, which develops flow and progression in a well-structured and relevant

argument. Outstanding articulation of argument/

Discussion.

Excellent structure, work is coherently structured and clearly expressed throughout showing a relevant, coherent and well considered progression of argument/ discussion.
Very good structure, which is relevant, coherent and logical, showing progression of the argument/ discussion.
Good structure argument/

Relevant discussion and ideas structured in a largely coherent manner.

Ordered presentation in which relevant ideas / concepts are reasonably expressed.
Work is loosely, and at times incoherently, structured, with irrelevant information and ideas that are often poorly expressed.
Information and ideas are irrelevant, with very poorly expressed ideas, and/or inappropriate style.

Analysis and Conclusions

20%

Exceptional analysis of subject with evidence of breadth and depth of study. Independent thinking, rigorous analysis.

Exceptional application of theory to problem with well formed, original conclusions.

Outstanding analysis displaying independent thought and strong, well organised argument and highly competent application of evidence and theory to solve problems. Well formed, original conclusions.
Excellent analysis displaying independent thought and well organised argument, highly competent application of evidence and theory to solve problems. Well formed, original conclusions.
Very good analysis and well organised argument, very well supported by evidence. Well argued with appropriate amount of evidence, substantiated opinions are given. Very good application of evidence leading to well-formed conclusions.
Good analysis and argument, well supported by evidence. Good application of evidence and theory to solve problem. Good conclusions provided substantiated by evidence.
There is some evidence of analysis and evaluation, but work is mainly descriptive with an uncritical acceptance of information, and unsubstantiated opinions may be evident. Conclusions lack depth or meaning.
Work is entirely or almost entirely descriptive, showing little or no evidence of analysis. Has accepted information uncritically. Unsubstantiated opinions usually present. No substantial conclusions drawn.
No evidence of analysis. Unsubstantiated opinions. No conclusions evident.

Sources and Evidence

10%

Exceptionally good reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature.
Outstanding reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature.
Excellent reference to and application of a wide range of relevant reading from a variety of sources and research informed literature.
Very good engagement with a wide range of relevant reading and variety of sources and research informed literature.
Good engagement with an appropriate range of reading beyond essential texts.
Evidence of reading, largely confined to essential texts, but mainly reliant on taught elements.
Poor engagement with essential texts and no evidence of wider reading. Heavily reliant on taught elements.
No evidence of reading or engagement with taught elements.

Adherence to Referencing Conventions, Technical Skills

10%

Accurate application of referencing with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies

Exceptional demonstration of subject specific skills and practices

Accurate application of referencing with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies.

Outstanding demonstration of subject specific skills and practices

Accurate application of referencing with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies.

Excellent demonstration of subject specific skills and practices

Consistent application of referencing with minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies.

Very good demonstration of subject specific skills and practices.

Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies.

Good demonstration of subject specific skills and practices.

Referencing may show inaccuracies and/or inconsistencies.

Satisfactory demonstration of subject specific skills and practices.

Inconsistent and weak use of referencing.

Unsatisfactory demonstration of subject specific skills and practices.

Absent or incoherent referencing.

No demonstration of subject specific skills and practices.

Written/

Visual/ Oral Style & Cl5arity

10%

Exceptional written style/ delivery/ presentation which demonstrates innovation and originality with considerable insight with exceptional clarity.
Demonstrates an exceptional range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.
Outstanding written style/ delivery/ presentation which demonstrates innovation and originality with considerable insight and outstanding clarity of expression.
Demonstrates an outstanding range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.
Excellent written style/ delivery/ presentation which demonstrates some originality, innovation and insight with excellent clarity of expression.
Demonstrates an excellent range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.
Very good written style/ delivery/ presentation which demonstrates depth and insight. Well-defined and clearly articulated. Demonstrates a broad range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.
Good written style/ delivery/ presentation. There may be occasional faults in the presentation of work and is for the most part, clearly expressed.

Demonstrates a range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.

Written style/ delivery/ presentation lacks clarity and depth but ideas are adequately expressed. Demonstrates a developing range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.
Work is poorly presented in a disjointed and incoherent manner.

Lacks a range of academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills.

Work is extremely disorganised, with much of the content confusingly expressed. No academic / discipline related qualities and transferable skills evident.