Assessment
Your performance in this module will be assessed via a case study assessment task to ensure assess the learning outcomes of the module. The assignment will be an opportunity for you to think through and to demonstrate an understanding of (in terms of application) some selected relevant ethical/CSR/HR theory and concepts.
Assessment Brief:
Applying the relevant theories, concepts and models from the module; critically evaluate a named case study organisation’s appraoch to responsible management (CSR, Sustainability, Ethical). You can choose to either:-
A) take a broad / mapping approach (i.e. look across their practices and identify and discuss key issues for CSR, sustainability and ethical practice)
Organisation: Mcdonals’s
Topic: CSR
Please do not only focus on the company, you should link the company to models or theories.
Thank you
To construct a great answer you need to demonstrate that you have done the following:
• Chosen a suitable case study organisation (either choose one suggested by the teaching team or have negotiated with the tutors) i.e. one for which you can obtain a good range and depth of information and / or one for which there is also an academic literature base
• Selected which are the approriate theories, models, cocepts and topics from the module content and applied them by discussing them in the context of your case study.
• Read widely including current journal articles / research papers and thinking (some in reading list and some from your own research).
• Have developed your own voice and ideas but support your arguments with literature, theories and secondary research.
• Not just been descriptive but applied thoery and been critical and will have addressed the ‘so what?’ issues and widened the argument to contemporary challenges within wider society. Another aspect of this could come from comparing and contrasted your case study example to others (either for similarity or dissimilarity).
Word Count:
Style: 4000 words +/- 10%.
Academic essay / prose style (but you can use subtitles, appendices and figures as appropriate).
Feedback: You will receive oral class-wide generic formative guidance and a tutorial/workshop on your developing work. Written tutor feedback and a provisional mark on your final work will be distributed to you in electronic form and the provisional mark will be put on Grade Centre.
Marks: Please note that any mark given in written feedback is provisional and subject to ratification by the Assessment Board in March 2015.
Turnitin: Turnitin will be used for the assessment. The assessment tasks must be submitted in paper to the Student Help and Information Point (SHIP) and also an electronic copy to Turnitin. You will be allowed any number of developmental draft submissions to Turnitin but your tutor will only take into account the LAST submission you make as the final one. You should note that access to Turnitin will end at the same time as final submission can be made to SHIP. It is your responsibility to ensure you submit your work on time. Work not submitted to both Turnitin and SHIP within the timescales allowed, will not be assessed. Submit your electronic copy on the Blackboard site, ‘Assessments / Turnitin’ page.
Back-up copies: Always keep regularly updated electronic back-up copies of your work as it is your responsibility to ensure that you have backup records of all your work. In the event of you having a computer failure, you will be required to show evidence of work in progress by way of backed-up copies of your work.
Submission: See the Assessment Diary software for the date by which you need to submit this assessent. Submit a paper copy to the SHIP and also an electronic copy to Turnitin (both by the deadline given on the Assessment Diary). Please use the printed /bar coded sheet from the Assessment Diary and attach to the front of your work.
Referral/Deferral Assessment: If you fail to reach the pass standard of 40% on your first attempt, you will need to complete a reassessment task, which is to re-do the original assessment task. Details of any referral work and deadlines will be communicated centrally and if you have questions about this, please contact your Course Administrator.
Further guidance will be included in the sessions
Marking Matrix
Class of Masters Distinction Merit Pass Refer / Fail
% Grade 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 20-39
Knowledge and understanding
Command of the topic, unusual creativity, perception and insight, all suggesting that work should be published in an academic forum. Demonstrates command of the topic by showing creativity, perception and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate. Demonstrates a well-informed understanding of the topic by showing creativity and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate. Understanding of contemporary academic debate, with some creative input and insight. Descriptive while demonstrating reasonable understanding. Limited / poor understanding demonstrated.
Any creative input is somewhat off the point.
Content and exploration of theories and ideas Outstanding selection that makes a substantial contribution to academic debate.
Outstanding selection from a wide relevant and innovative range of perspectives and sources. Selection from a wide and relevant range of perspectives and sources that draws upon contemporary academic debate. Relevant selection from a good and relevant range of perspectives and sources.
Sources mostly well-integrated into the overall argument. Relevant but not wide selection from a reasonable range of sources. Some / minimal relevant sources and limited topic coverage.
Analysis and
synthesis
Outstanding use of source material.
Excellent argument that is of the highest academic quality. Sources very well integrated into the overall argument.
Clear, well-structured argument that is well crafted and cogent. Sources well-integrated into the overall argument.
Clear, cogent and well-structured argument. Mostly clear, cogent and well-structured argument. Sources sometimes properly integrated into the argument.
Some tendencies towards a clear and cogent argument. Sources only occasionally / not at all integrated into the argument.
Some / minimal structure and argument present.
Critical engagement and analysis
Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question, to a high degree of excellence. Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question. Critical distance and sound analysis of the question. Demonstrates criticality and generally good analysis. Some successful analysis with a tendency to accept the source material at face value. Limited / poor analysis and criticality with reliance on limited sources.
Technical skills and referencing Referencing impeccable using appropriate conventions.
No errors in grammar or spelling. Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions.
Virtually no errors in grammar or spelling. Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions.
Near perfect
grammar and spelling, with only a few errors. Referencing clear and mostly accurate using appropriate conventions.
Good grammar and spelling with some errors. References adequate but clearer and/or more references needed.
Reasonable grammar and spelling but with several notable errors. References limited/inappropriate.
Many errors in grammar and spelling, making it difficult or impossible to read.
Mark of 0-19: Non serious attempt e.g. answer irrelevant to set question or completely insufficient, or non-submission.
