Essay-Paper Assignment

You need to write 4-page essay to complete part1&part2 following all instructions below.

Assessment Number 1
Assessment Type (and weighting) Portfolio – including evidence of study and research skills, a proposal and ethics form.(60%)
Assessment Name Portfolio
Assessment Submission Date

Learning Outcomes

Assessment
Demonstrate effective academic study skills at Master’s level in relation to academic writing, presentations, referencing, plagiarism avoidance strategies and research Portfolio – including evidence of study and research skills, a proposal and ethics form.
Develop and justify an research aim/question and objectives for an original research project in a strategic business or management area Portfolio – including evidence of study and research skills, a proposal and ethics form.
Devise a research strategy to underpin the achievement of the proposed research aim/question and objectives which takes ethical considerations into account Portfolio – including evidence of study and research skills, a proposal and ethics form.

Assignment Brief:

Portfolio 60% There are 2 parts to this component.

Your electronic portfolio will contain the evidence to prove you have the appropriate level of Research and Academic Skills to proceed to your Dissertation.

Part 1 Learning Outcomes 1 & 2

Your electronic portfolio should contain the following:
Certificate of Attendance at:
Academic Referencing 2hrs
Academic Writing 2hrs
Ethics Form for your Research Proposal (RE1)
A Problem Statement – 2 pages
Explain and rationalize the problem selected on the basis of the following: specific significance, uniqueness and value to the company. In short, you must justify its selection on the basis of these three criteria.
Write out a Problem Statement (PS) for the problem identified with a brief explanation. This should be discussed with your Tutor prior to submission to ensure the focus of your research is appropriate and manageable.
You need to find 1 source from reading list below to support your writing about this part.

Part 2 Learning Outcome 3

Write a Research Proposal of 2 page for a research topic that is in the domain of your programme of study, of sufficient interest to yourself to ultimately be the basis for your Masters Dissertation project and meets the pragmatic criteria given to you for a reasonable and feasible topic. This proposal should be based on your Problem Statement in Part 1 and will be expanded to include how you will shape your research with justification for the same.
Students should submit a Research Title (Research problem related to Business) feasible research objectives, rationale and research plan and underpinning research philosophy

Guidance for Part 2

Using the Problem Statement and justification outlined in Part 1 –

Introduction
Research background of the chosen company in depth
Discuss the problem you have identified using research study of books, peer reviewed journals, periodicals, white papers, and other dissertation papers found in the University of Bolton (UoB) e-Library, etc, to discover and identify the problems.
Sketch out feasible research objectives for a possible project to solve the identified problem
Research Philosophy underpinning the research
You should also generate an indicative bibliography list for the planned study, in Harvard convention (further details on Harvard notation are available from http://data.bolton.ac.uk/bissto/infoskills/useinfo/cite/harvard/index.htm)
You need to find 1 source from reading list below to support your writing about this part.

All written work should be referenced using the standard University of Bolton referencing style– see: https://www.bolton.ac.uk/library/Study-Skills/Referencing/Home.aspx

Indicative Reading List
Moore, S. (2010). The Ultimate Study Skills Handbook. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press – Online available via Discover@Bolton
O’Gorman, K., & MacIntosh, R. (2015). Research Methods for Business and Management: A Guide to Writing your Dissertation (2nd ed.). Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Limited – Online available via Discover@Bolton
Silvis, C. A. (2015). Presentation Skills: One Hour Workshop. Andover: Cengage Learning PTR – Online available via Discover@Bolton
Thomas, A. B. (2014). Research Concepts for Management Studies. Florence: Routledge – Online available via Discover@Bolton
Wang, G. T., & Park, K. (2015). Student Research and Report Writing : From Topic Selection to the Complete Paper (1st ed.). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell – Online available via Discover@Bolton
LEAP Online: https://www.bolton.ac.uk/leaponline/My-Digital-Literacy/My-Virtual-Learning/LEAP-Online.aspx

Specific Assessment Criteria:
(Please note that the General Assessment Criteria will also apply. Please see below)

Exceptional Quality (70% and above)
Introduction to research Context is exceptionally clear and concise. Clear statement of problem and associated objectives. Persuasive and comprehensive rationale. Task demanding. There is evidence of extensive in depth additional research completed. Correctly referenced where necessary. The background to the project is fully described and critically analysed. All areas are critically analysed and shows evidence of extensive in depth additional research completed. An excellent range of authoritative secondary data sources has been researched and used. Referencing is clear, relevant and consistently accurate. Reference list will contain more than fifteen to twenty sources. Full critical review of literature relevant to study. Comprehensive knowledge. Conceptual framework underpins study. The Literature Review shows evidence of extensive in depth research. There is clarity of expression, with consistently accurate use of grammar and spelling, with fluent professional/academic writing.

Very Good Quality (60-69%)
Introduction to research Context is clear and concise. Subject valid and relevant. Appropriate rationale. Task clear and explicit. Scope for study appropriate. Focus maintained on issue. Evidence of additional research shown. Correctly referenced where necessary. The background to the project is described but one or two areas could be more detailed. The research question(s) are clear and achievable. Evidence of additional research evident. Sound knowledge of topic. Some critical review. Conceptual framework underpins study. Clear review including majority of academic journal references. Reference list will contain between fifteen to twenty sources. There is significant evidence of originality and creativity as appropriate. A wide range of authoritative secondary data sources has been researched and used. Sources are accurately cited and an appropriate reference list/bibliography in the correct style if provided. The work is generally clearly presented, with good grammar and spelling.

Good Quality (50-59%)
Introduction to research Context is clear. Subject valid and relevant. Some shortcomings in clarity of purpose and associated objectives. Task definition could improve but clear & explicit. Some additional research shown and sources are referenced A simple description of the background to the project is provided. Research question(s) is stated but lacks depth. Some additional research shown . Satisfactory knowledge. Gaps and omissions in review. Some attempt at critical comment. Conceptual framework may be incomplete or inappropriate. Reference list will contain less than fifteen to twenty sources. There are relatively minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing.

Satisfactory Quality (40 to 49%)
The work should demonstrate some grasp of theoretical, conceptual, analytical and practical elements of the team working process. Some omissions are evident in the deployment of the relevant information/skills. There is evidence of a limited integration of theory, practice and information in relation to management skills and a limited evidence of originality and creativity. The candidate provides very limited referencing including some inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

< 40% (Fail) Unsatisfactory Performance
Introduction to research Context is under developed, unclear or absent. Research question is unclear, unfeasible or absent. Communication and presentation – Often poor or ambiguous, leading to meaning being barely apparent. Language, grammar and spelling poor. Research philosophy is not understood/not related to objectives. Other relevant considerations are omitted or superficial. Deficiencies or omissions in information, skills, and theoretical, conceptual, analytical, creative or practical elements relating to effective team working are found. There is poor integration of these in relation to the question set. There is little or no evidence of originality and creativity as appropriate.

General Assessment Guidelines for Written Assessments
% Relevance Knowledge Argument/Analysis Structure Presentation Written English Research/Referencing
DISTINCTION
Exceptional Quality 85-100% Directly relevant to title/brief.
Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge of theory and practice for this level.
Insightfully interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding. Presents an exceptional critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions.
Demonstrates distinctive, insightful and creative solutions to complex problems.
Produces exceptional work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area. Coherently articulated and logically structured.

An appropriate format is used. Exceptional presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment.
Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP).
Exceptionally well written
answer with standard spelling and grammar.
Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text.

An extensive range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style.
Excellent Quality 70-84% Directly relevant to title/brief.

Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Demonstrates an excellent knowledge of theory and practice for this level.
Expertly interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding. Presents an excellent critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions.
Demonstrates insightful and creative thinking solutions to complex problems.
Produces excellent work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area. Coherently articulated and logically structured.

An appropriate format is used. Excellent presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment.
Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP).
Excellently written
answer with standard spelling and grammar.
Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text.
A wide range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style.
MERIT Good Quality 60-69% Directly relevant to title/brief.

Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief well. Demonstrates a sound knowledge of theory and practice for this level.
Comprehensively interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding Presents a cohesive critique of key research material resulting in clear and original conclusions.
Demonstrates creative solutions to complex problems.
Produces superior work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area For the most part coherently articulated and logically constructed.

An appropriate format is used. Very good presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment.
Effective inclusion of FTP. Well written with
standard spelling and grammar. Style is clear and academic.
Sources accurately cited in the text.
A range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style.
PASS Satisfactory Quality 50-59% Generally addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.

Minor irrelevance in places. Demonstrates an adequate knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Some minor omissions.
Satisfactorily interprets some appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Demonstrates some originality in conceptual understanding. Presents some critique of key research material resulting in original conclusions. Loss of focus in places.
Demonstrates some creativity in solving complex problems.
Produces satisfactory work that makes some contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area. Adequate attempt at articulation and logical structure.

An acceptable format is used. The presentational style & layout is largely correct for the type of assignment.

Inclusion of FTP but lacks selectivity. Competently written with minor lapses in spelling and grammar.

Style is legible and mainly academic.
Key contemporary and relevant academic sources are drawn upon.

Most sources are accurately cited in the text and reference list/bibliography.
Minor weaknesses evident.
FAIL Borderline Fail 45-49% Some implications of issues explored.

Some irrelevant and/or superficial arguments.
Some omissions evident in knowledge of theory and practice at this level.
Insufficient understanding of appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Demonstrates some conceptual understanding in places. A limited amount of critique of key research material with description in places. Lacks creativity. Some original conclusions.

Limited attempt at articulation and problems with structure.

Some formatting errors. Some weaknesses in the presentational style & layout.

Some inappropriate use of FTP. Intermittent lapses in grammar and spelling.

Style hinders clarity in places and is not academic throughout. Limited number of contemporary and relevant sources cited. Weaknesses in referencing technique.
Fail
30-44%
Significant degree of irrelevance to the title and/or brief.

Issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms. Demonstrates weaknesses in knowledge of theory and practice for this level.
Limited understanding and application of concepts. A basic argument is presented, but too descriptive or narrative in style.
Limited originality and creativity.
Conclusions are not clearly stated. Poorly structured. Lack of articulation.
Format deficient. For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking.

FTP ignored in text or not used where clearly needed. Deficiencies in spelling and grammar make reading difficult in places.

Simplistic or repetitious style impairs clarity. Inappropriate sources and poor referencing technique.

<30%
Relevance to the title and/or brief is intermittent or missing.

The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms. Demonstrates a lack of basic knowledge of either theory or practice for this level, with little evidence of conceptual understanding. Severely limited arguments. Descriptive or narrative in style with no evidence of critique and originality or creativity.
Conclusions are sparse. Unstructured.
Lack of articulation.

Format deficient. For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking.
FTP as above. Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in grammar, spelling, expression and style. An absence of academic sources and poor referencing technique.