To develop a critical literature review of a business issue relevant to your degree title.

Module Code

TM9644

Module Title

Contemporary Business Enquiry

Statement of task

This assessment invites you to address the following task:

To develop a critical literature review of a business issue relevant to your degree title.

Word Limit

The total word limit for this assessment is 5,000 words (4,500 - word review & 500-word proposal form)

Weighting

This assessment is worth 100% of the total marks available for this module

Submission of Assessment

The Proposal and Literature review should be submitted electronically, online via Turnitin.

You will find a Turnitin link to submit your assessment on the module eLP Blackboard site.  It is your responsibility to ensure that your assessment is submitted by the submission deadline stated. Penalties apply for late submissions

Provision of feedback

Written feedback will be provided 20 working days from your submission deadline.

Does not meet Standards

Meets Standards

Exceeds Standards

Assessment Criteria

Completely insufficient

Insufficient

Adequate

Good

Very Good

Excellent

Outstanding

0-29%

30-39%

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

Topic Proposal (5%)

Completely Insufficient detail.

Insufficient, lacks adequate overview of business enquiry, no aim or objectives, inclusion of inappropriate or unrelated references.

Adequate attempt of overview provided. May be poorly structured. Overly generic, weak aim/ objectives & limited/ inappropriate references, may be merely listed & not integrated.

Good, well produced proposal & overview of business enquiry. Demonstrates topic appreciation at this early stage, some linked objectives & integration of current, appropriate references.

Very good proposal, well justified & constructed overview. Clear & related objectives & evidence of good initial reading & understanding of the enquiry, with contemporary sources well integrated.

Excellent proposal, strong evidence of topic understanding & appreciation of key authors/ references which are very well integrated.

Outstanding proposal, well constructed,  supported & demonstrates high quality & focused selection & appreciation of the business enquiry.

Structure & Presentation (10%)

Completely insufficient, lacks coherent structure or flow, superficial & no real alignment between the enquiry and the descriptive topic provided. Significant grammatical/ sentencing & referencing issues.

Insufficient, lacks coherent structure & flow. Writing is superficial in content, many grammatical / referencing errors which reduce overall readability.

Adequate, needs a greater coherence in structure & flow, & more focused argument. Some grammatical or referencing errors which reduces readability.

Good, some evidence of ability to structure arguments, although may be quite simplistic. A few errors in grammar but does not detract from readability.

Very good clear evidence of the ability to structure arguments. Strong structure & flow, very good readability & only minor grammatical or referencing errors.

Excellent, strong evidence of the ability to construct supporting arguments and summarise academic debates. Excellent flow & readability.

Outstanding writing style, well constructed comprehensive arguments, student demonstrates excellent ability to choose words carefully to extend understanding & build arguments for the reader.

Abstract (5%)

Completely insufficient or missing.

Insufficient and what is provided is poorly constructed, too brief or has no alignment with the main body of the review.

Adequate attempt in its coverage, one or more components expected within an abstract may be missing. Poor alignment with main body of review.

Good presentation of the abstract, majority of requirements are noted & appropriate number & linkage with key words.

Very good abstract, all necessary components in place, very good length & selection of key words.

Excellent abstract. Comprehensive & well written.

Outstanding abstract.

References (10%)

Completely insufficient, may be too few, inappropriate, overly dated or not aligned with enquiry topic.  

Insufficient in respect of quantity, quality or relevance to outlined enquiry.

Adequate attempt but may include too many dated sources or poorly selected sources. Greater integration required to support the flow of discussion, rather than merely list.

Good in respect of quantity & quality, may have issues with dated, choice of some sources included, repetition of references but overall reasonably integration to support argument.

Very good in respect of quantity & quality. Majority are contemporary, all key authors noted & variety of credible sources well integrated within arguments.

Excellent in respect of quantity & quality. Key seminal authors noted, all references appropriate to the topic & clear criticality in their argument integration.

Outstanding in respect of quality & quantity. Contemporary, appropriate, excellent integration to support arguments, moves beyond established debates & deep insights provided from the references integrated.

Main Body- knowledge of theory & Research  (25%)

AoL 6.1.1

Completely insufficient. Topic is overly simplistic, no or inarticulate objectives, no justification in terms of importance or relevance of topic to industry. Lacks structure & fails to identify appropriate literature consistent with the topic enquiry.

Insufficient, topic is too simplistic or overly complicated in terms of student voice and clarity of understanding. Objectives may be missing/ misaligned with main arguments of review, no signposting between sections to acknowledge interrelationship between key topic themes.

Adequate attempt, the topic is adequate, objectives are reasonably aligned, however may be unchallenging or unrealistic in context of the enquiry. Some structure/ signposting of relevance of literature to the enquiry. Demonstrates basic appreciation of the key aspects of the topic from a theoretical perspective.

Good attempt, good topic choice and overview of key tenants of the related literature. Objectives sound but not overly challenging or very broad. Does demonstrate structuring of argument aligned with appropriate theoretical underpinning and some signposting between sections.

Very good, topic is reasonably challenging, strongly constructed objectives and solid justification for topic from a business perspective.  Demonstrates very good topic understanding & the application of theory to business practice.

Excellent, challenging topic which demonstrates excellent understanding of the associated theoretical and academic underpinning and relevance to business practice.

Outstanding, very challenging topic which demonstrates excellent subject understanding with an originality of argument. Demonstrates outstanding knowledge of contemporary business & management practice and the interrelationships with theory & research.

Main Body – Creative & Critical Thinking skills (25%)

AoL 6.2.2

Completely insufficient,  demonstrates no aspects of analysis or criticality within the writing, merely descriptive content poorly aligned with the topic as stated.

Insufficient, writing is merely description of areas of the topic, with little supporting commentary and  not always relevant to the noted topic enquiry. Poorly or inappropriately supported by referenced evidence.

Adequate construction of evidenced argument, aspects of analysis evident in relation to key aspects of the literature integrated, but lacks criticality within writing in relation to the interrelationships with an emphasis on description.

Good, writing does demonstrate sound elements of analysis and engagement with the key debates within the literature. Does require stronger integration of critical analysis and movement beyond the established debates.

Very good,  well structured signposting and structure to the constructed arguments, evidence of criticality demonstrated throughout. Moves beyond established debates and integration of wider range of authors to challenge aspects of the topic.

Excellent, exceptionally well constructed arguments and signposting between sections, all building towards a compelling and  critically written review. Demonstrates creativity within writing, challenging the established debates and authors, providing extensively supported critical arguments.

Outstanding, demonstrates outstanding critical thinking skills in terms of debates/ associated theory for the enquiry.  Each argument builds comprehensively upon each other to and moves well beyond established debates Clear aspects of  originality in thinking are apparent and challenge the thinking of others with the business and management of the topic.

Conclusion (20%)

AoL 6.1.3

Completely insufficient, may be non-existent or exceptionally brief, does not evaluate or conclude the key findings of the literature.

Insufficient in detail in terms of summarizing the key findings of the literature review.

Adequate description of the key aspects of the review, however reliance on description, repetition and lacks evidence to support.

Good summary but could be improved with greater degree of evidence and closer alignment with the main body of the review – not always clear where conclusions drawn from.

Very good summary, evidence of how key conclusions were developed and evidence to support. Some note to contribution of practice/ industry.

Excellent summary in that it successfully identifies the contribution to practice provided by the review, excellent support of evidence to the key conclusions drawn.

Outstanding summary and strongly drawn conclusions. Thoroughly supported by evidence and aligned with key arguments drawn through the main body of the review.