Task 2: Assessment Brief
| Module: | Business Research |
| Assessment Title: | Research Report |
| Individual/Group: | Individual |
| Word Count: | 2,500 words +/- 10% Markers will stop reading after the + 10% point and the grade will be based on what the marker has read up to this point. |
| Weighting: | 70% |
| Submission Date: |
| There are three activities which make up Task 2 as follows:- Activity A: Literature Review (1,000 words) You will produce a written critical review of key literature based on the themes of your business research (identified as part of Task 1) to inform and support your business research project. Activity B: Fully supported rationale for your chosen research method and design (1,500 words) You will produce a written narrative explaining and fully justifying your research method and design. To do this you will evaluate business research methods analysing the appropriateness of their use for your chosen business research topic, fully justifying the rationale for your chosen method(s) specified in your outline proposal for Task 1. Activity C: Supporting Appendices for your Ethics Approval ProForma As appendices to a UREC ProForma you are expected to attach a range of supporting documentation. For this activity you are specifically required to submit:- Project Plan/Gantt Chart – A diagrammatic representation of the key activities, milestones and timings for your project Contingency Plan – A plan identifying potential problems/risks at each key stage of the project and contingency plan for overcoming these |
Submission Guidance:
Word Count
For this task the word count applies to Activities A and B only. All text apart from tables, charts, appendices and bibliography is included in the word count.
Referencing
Your work should use relevant academic theory and be supported by academic referencing.
University uses APA 6* referencing style in order to extend the choice of online tools and apps you can use to make referencing easier. Find out about APA referencing and the range of apps and online tools for quick and easier referencing at: https://libguides.shu.ac.uk/referencing.
Please note that the University is moving to the new APA 7 Style which you can use in this assignment instead of APA 6.
Presentation & Formatting
- Use Calibri or Arial font size 11 and 1.5 line spacing
- Include page numbers at the bottom of each page
- Your cover page should include the following information:
- Your name and student ID
- Module name
- Assessment Task Title
- Details of any learning contract requirements
- Word count
Submitting your work
You should submit your work online via the Blackboard submission point on the hand in date.
Turnitin submission
This is required for Activity A and B only.
You will need to upload the final version of your work to the Turnitin submission point on the hand in date.
Task 2: Detailed Assessment Criteria
| Assessment criteria | 0-3 28 32 35 38 | 4-6 42 45 48 | 7-9 52 55 58 | 10-12 62 65 68 | 13-15 72 75 78 | 16 82 |
| LITERATURE REVIEW: Demonstrates a critical appreciation of the relevant subject using key credible and relevant sources WEIGHTING: 30% | A weak review of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. There are omissions of content and/or inappropriate content used | A satisfactory constructed review of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. This is descriptive only | A good clear, logically constructed review of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. This may fail to develop the link to the research question(s) fully | A very good clear, logically constructed summary of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. Development of the links between the research question(s)/hypothesis may not be fully achieved | An excellent clear, logically constructed summary of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. The link between the research question(s) or hypothesis is fully supported by the review | An outstanding summary of key literature in this field outlining the debates concerning the topic. The link between the research question(s) or hypothesis is fully supported by the review |
| RESEARCH METHODS RATIONALE: Evaluation of appropriate business research methods WEIGHTING: 40% | Little/no discussion or understanding of alternative and appropriate business research methods. Little/no evaluation and analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed | Reasonable understanding and discussion of business research methods that includes some evaluation and analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed | Good understanding and discussion of business research methods that includes good evaluation and analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed | Very good understanding and discussion of business research methods that includes critical evaluation and analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed | Excellent understanding and discussion of business research methods that includes thorough critical evaluation and critical analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed | Excellent understanding and discussion of business research methods that includes thorough critical evaluation and critical analysis of their use for the business research topic being discussed that demonstrates considerable insight |
| PROJECT PLAN: Creation of a diagrammatic representation of the key activities and milestones WEIGHTING: 10% | Poor or no Project Plan of key activities and/or milestones | Satisfactory Project Plan of key activities | Good Project Plan of key activities and some milestones | Very good use of Project Plan to illustrate the key activities and milestones which could become a useful tool | Excellent Project Plan of the key activities and stages. A very competent piece of work creating a most useful planning tool | An outstanding Project Plan of the key activities and stages. A highly competent piece of work creating a most useful planning tool |
| CONTINGENCY PLAN: Identification of potential problems and contingency planning WEIGHTING 10% | Ill thought through or no problems identified. Poor or no contingency planning | Few potential problems identified. Weak contingency planning | Identification of some potential problems and basic contingency planning | Identifies a range of potential problems and shows evidence of well-considered contingency planning | Demonstrates an excellent understanding of potential problems. Excellent standard of contingency planning | Demonstrates an excellent understanding of potential problems. Outstanding standard of contingency planning |
| Presentation and referencing of work in an appropriate form WEIGHTING: 10% | Work is weak. Poor presentation. It is not appropriately referenced and may shows errors in accuracy/style of referencing and citations | Presentation of work is acceptable. Some evidence of appropriate and accurate referencing however it may show inconsistencies or errors in accuracy/style of referencing and citations | Presentation of work is good and demonstrates a good degree of consistency. Evidence of appropriate and accurate referencing however it may show limited inconsistencies or errors in accuracy/style of referencing and citations | Presentation of work is very good and demonstrates a very good degree of consistency. Very strong evidence of appropriate and accurate referencing however it may show very limited inconsistencies or errors in accuracy/style of referencing and citations | Presentation of work is excellent and demonstrates a high degree of consistency. Excellent evidence of appropriate and accurate referencing and citations | Outstanding presentation appropriate and accurate referencing and citations throughout |
