You are required to write a 1500-word essay which provides a detailed, critical analysis of a country’s existing model of public management. First, select a country of your choosing
Public Management (N1598) UG
Module Assessments Breakdown
|
Mode
|
% of The Module Mark
|
Brief Description
|
Length
|
|
ESS
|
30%
|
Essay
|
1500 words
|
|
TAP
|
70%
|
24 hour take away paper
|
24 hours
|
Assessment 1 - Essay
Link to Module Learning Outcomes
The coursework essay links particularly to learning outcomes one and two. The essay process therefore encourages students to demonstrate: a critical understanding of well- established principles of public management and relevant theories and approaches to public management; and comprehend processes of change in the management of public sector organisations.
Description
You are required to write a 1500-word essay which provides a detailed, critical analysis of a country’s existing model of public management. First, select a country of your choosing. Then, undertake a review of the literature on that country’s system of public management. Drawing from public management theories and concepts, identify strengths and weaknesses in the model or models being used. Make recommendations, where appropriate, as to how limitations and challenges in the existing system of public management could be resolved.
Structure
You are free to choose how you wish to structure the report. However, it recommended that your essay includes the following components:
- Introduction - in which the structure of the report is laid out.
- Analysis of existing system(s) in country – in which the existing system of public management in the country is described using key terms and concepts, that is, based on the traditional model or NPM or other approach(es), using evidence and examples to illustrate how certain practices and approaches fit with these concepts.
- Critical reflection of approach(es) used in the country– in which the existing systems of public management in the country are critically assessed in terms of the theories and practical aspects, drawing on relevant academic sources of literature
- Recommendations – in which proposals for the use of other models, theories and tools are explored drawing on your wider reading.
- Conclusions – in which the ideas are summarised. No new material should be included in a conclusion.
There is a wealth of information which will be of value in completing this report. This includes references to journal articles, books and other sources from the literature surrounding Public management.
Selection of organisation
Students may select any country as a focus for the essay, however it is advised that students check there is adequate public management literature surrounding the case study identified
Wider reading & References
Wider reading around the theoretical literature is essential as is a reading around the organisation. The essay should use consistent and comprehensive referencing based around one particular style.
Word count
The essay is expected to be 1500 words +/- 10%. This does NOT include references.
Charts and diagrams
The essay may include charts and diagrams. These should be clearly linked to the main text. References to sources used must be included and these do not count towards the word limit.
Deadlines and Submission
Please check Sussex Direct for the specific deadlines for the submission of the assessed work, which will be submitted electronically through Canvas. Please check Sussex Direct carefully for the submission deadline.
Support
As with all assessments, the module team will be available and willing to discuss any aspects of this with you at feedback sessions throughout the module. As with all assessments, however, the module teaching team will not review draft essays.
Marking Criteria
The marking criteria for this essay can be found below:
|
Criteria
|
Reading and Knowledge
|
Analysis and Argument
|
Organisation and Presentation
|
|
Weight
|
40%
|
40%
|
20%
|
|
Sub- criteria
|
Level of reading Level of knowledge
|
Level of analysis (or argument)
Critical thinking
|
Referencing General presentation General organisation
Use of language
|
|
Mark
|
Reading and Knowledge Mark Descriptor
|
Analysis and Argument Mark Descriptor
|
Organisation and Presentation Mark
Descriptor
|
|
80+
|
Extensive reading and exceptionally comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through the use of a wide range of high quality academic journal articles, books and reliable newspapers and magazines
|
Outstanding critical and analytical assessment of the topic. Clear evidence of independent and original thought, ability to defend a position logically and convincingly with arguments presented that are sophisticated and highly challenging.
|
Outstanding organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument). Outstanding English with no grammatical mistakes. Outstanding referencing and extensive bibliography.
|
|
70-79
|
Excellent and wide reading and comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through the use of a high quality academic journal articles, books and reliable newspapers and magazines.
|
Excellent critical argument on the topic and / or analysis.
Clear evidence of independent thought, ability to defend a position logically and convincingly.
|
Excellent thought given to organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
Excellent English with appropriate referencing and comprehensive bibliography.
|
|
60-69
|
Good range of reading and good knowledge. Only a few academic journal articles may be referred, alongside books and reliable online sources
|
Good analysis and / or argument. Evidence of some critical thought with a well-developed argument.
|
Good organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
|
|
|
.
|
|
Good English with appropriate referencing and bibliography.
|
|
50-59
|
Satisfactory reading and reasonable knowledge. There may be little reference to academic journal articles, and the reading may be limited to textbooks and online sources.
|
Adequate analysis and / or argument. Little evidence of critical thought in the analysis (or argument). The argument may be largely one-sided.
|
Satisfactory organisation & presentation, with much scope for improvement.
Adequate level of English with several grammatical mistakes. Satisfactory, yet inconsistent referencing.
|
|
40-49
|
Limited reading and incomplete knowledge. Several unreliable online sources used.
|
Limited awareness of the topic. Very superficial analysis or argument.
|
Limited effort in organisation & presentation. Inadequate level of English language and limited effort to use a proper referencing style.
|
|
<40
|
Poor level of reading and failure to demonstrate competent knowledge.
Several unreliable online sources used.
|
Poor and unacceptable awareness of the topic. Failure to demonstrate competent understanding. Lack of thought and/or confused or irrelevant argument.
|
Lack of organisation & presentation. Substantial errors in English and very poor or absent referencing and bibliography.
|
Interpreting Marks
You can interpret your overall mark using this table:
|
Mark
|
Classification
|
Description
|
|
90-100
|
Exceptional 1st
|
Unlikely, due to the subjectivity of the assessment.
|
|
80-89
|
Outstanding 1st
|
Outstanding reading and knowledge, outstanding critical analysis and /or argument, and outstanding organisation and presentation.
|
|
70-79
|
Clear 1st
|
Excellent reading and knowledge, excellent critical analysis and /or argument, and excellent organisation and presentation. MINOR improvements needed in EITHER of the three areas.
|
|
60-69
|
2.1
|
Good standard of reading and knowledge, good analysis and /or argument, and good organisation and presentation. MAJOR improvements needed in ONE of the three areas.
|
|
50-59
|
2.2
|
Adequate or Satisfactory level of reading and knowledge, satisfactory analysis and /or argument, and satisfactory organisation and presentation. Major improvements needed in AT LEAST TWO of the three areas.
|
|
40-49
|
3rd
|
Acceptable reading and knowledge, acceptable critical analysis and /or argument and acceptable organisation and presentation. Major improvements needed in ALL of the three areas.
|
|
35-39
|
Marginal Fail
|
Poor reading and knowledge, poor critical analysis and /or argument and poor organisation and presentation. The essay may be incomplete or might have missed answering the relevant question appropriately.
|
|
0-34
|
Absolute Fail
|
Extremely poor reading and knowledge, poor critical analysis and /or argument and poor organisation and presentation. The essay may be incomplete or might have missed answering the relevant question appropriately.
|
Assessment 2 – 24hr Take away paper (70%)
Link to Module Learning Outcomes
The take away (TAP) paper links to learning objectives one and three. Specifically the TAP request students demonstrate a critical understanding of well-established principles of public management and relevant theories and approaches to public management, and demonstrate the ability to deploy key frameworks, methods and tools to analyse different types of public organisations.
Description
- The exam is an essay-format assessment focusing on concepts from Public Management.
- You will have 24 hours to complete the exam and submit your answers.
- There will be six questions to choose from on the exam paper.
- Students must answer only two questions: one question from Section A and one question from Section B.
- You must submit a maximum of 500 words for each answer, and no more than 1000 words in total.
Preparation
- Students need to revise the lecture content and related readings.
- Seminars are useful in reinforcing and developing knowledge for the module.
- Independent revision is essential to prepare for the TAP.
- Reading through and practicing with past papers under exam conditions is also strongly recommended.
Support
- A revision session will be provided in week 11. This session will begin with an overview of practical tips for dealing with the paper before going through a mock paper with students.
- A mock paper will be provided to students to provide a tool for practice and clear illustration of what to expect.
Marking Criteria
The marking criteria for this TAP can be found below:
|
Mark
|
Reading & Knowledge 40% Mark Descriptor
|
Analysis & Argument 40% Mark Descriptor
|
Organisation 20% Mark Descriptor
|
|
70+
|
Evidence of extensive reading and exceptionally comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through accurate and detailed answer.
|
Evidence of Outstanding critical and analytical assessment of the topic with clear evidence of independent and original thought.
|
Outstanding organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
|
|
60-
|
Evidence of Good range of
|
Evidence of good analysis and /
|
Evidence of good organisation
|
|
69
|
reading and good knowledge
|
or argument with some critical
|
& presentation of the analysis
|
|
|
indicated in generally accurate
|
thought and a well-developed
|
(or argument).
|
|
|
and near complete answer.
|
argument.
|
|
|
50-
59
|
Evidence of satisfactory reading and reasonable knowledge.
|
Evidence of adequate analysis and / or argument. Little evidence of critical thought in the analysis (or argument) or an imbalanced argument.
|
Evidence of satisfactory organisation & presentation, with much scope for improvement.
|
|
40-
49
|
Evidence of only a limited reading and incomplete knowledge.
|
Evidence of limited awareness of the topic. Very superficial analysis or argument.
|
Evidence of limited effort in organisation & presentation.
|
|
<40
|
Evidence of a poor level of reading and failure to demonstrate competent knowledge.
|
Evidence of a poor and unacceptable awareness of the topic. Failure to demonstrate competent understanding. Lack of thought and/or confusion.
|
Evidence of a lack of organisation & presentation.
|
Resit Assessment 1 – Essay
Link to Module Learning Outcomes
The coursework resit essay links particularly to learning outcomes one and two. The essay process therefore encourages students to demonstrate: a critical understanding of well- established principles of public management and relevant theories and approaches to public management; and comprehend processes of change in the management of public sector organisations.
Description
You are required to write a 1,500 word project that critically examines a public management-related theory or key concept. First, select a theory (e.g. NPM) or concept (e.g. Accountability). Then, undertake a review of the literature on the selected theory or concept. Subsequently, use examples and evidence of the implementation of the theory or concept (both successful and unsuccessful) from around the world to evaluate the implications of the implementation of the theory or concept for management of public sector organisations.
Structure
You are free to choose how you wish to structure the report. However, it recommended that your essay includes the following components:
- Introduction – in which the focus of the project is introduced and the structure of the report is laid out.
- Analysis – in which the theory or concept, its origins and purpose are discussed.
- Implementation – in which evidence and examples of how the theory or concept has been implemented in practice are discussed and the positive and negative implications for the management of public sector organisations.
- Critical Reflection – in which the theory or key concept will be subject to critical reflection, drawing on the theoretical literature and evidence and examples to reach some involved conclusions pertaining to the topic selected.
- Conclusions – in which there will be a brief summary the key points presented in the project. No new material should be included in a conclusion.
Wider reading & References
Wider reading around the theoretical literature is essential as is reading for examples and evidence to support the argument. The resit essay should use consistent and comprehensive referencing based around one particular style.
Word count
The essay is expected to be 1500 words +/- 10%. This does NOT include references.
Charts and diagrams
The essay may include charts and diagrams. These should be clearly linked to the main text. References to sources used must be included and these do not count towards the word limit.
Deadlines and Submission
Please carefully check Sussex Direct for the specific deadlines for the submission of the resit instrument.
Support
As with all assessments, the module team will be available and willing to discuss any aspects of the resit with you. As with all assessments, however, the module teaching team will not review drafts essays
Marking Criteria
The marking criteria for this essay can be found below:
|
Criteria
|
Reading and Knowledge
|
Analysis and Argument
|
Organisation and Presentation
|
|
Weight
|
40%
|
40%
|
20%
|
|
Sub- criteria
|
Level of reading Level of knowledge
|
Level of analysis (or argument)
Critical thinking
|
Referencing General presentation General organisation
Use of language
|
|
Mark
|
Reading and Knowledge Mark Descriptor
|
Analysis and Argument Mark Descriptor
|
Organisation and Presentation Mark
Descriptor
|
|
80+
|
Extensive reading and exceptionally comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through the use of a wide range of high quality academic journal articles, books and reliable newspapers and magazines.
|
Outstanding critical and analytical assessment of the topic. Clear evidence of independent and original thought, ability to defend a position logically and convincingly with arguments presented that are sophisticated and highly challenging.
|
Outstanding organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument). Outstanding English with no grammatical mistakes. Outstanding referencing and extensive bibliography.
|
|
70-79
|
Excellent and wide reading and comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through the use of a high quality academic journal articles, books and reliable newspapers and magazines.
|
Excellent critical argument on the topic and / or analysis.
Clear evidence of independent thought, ability to defend a position logically and convincingly.
|
Excellent thought given to organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
Excellent English with appropriate referencing and comprehensive bibliography.
|
|
60-69
|
Good range of reading and good knowledge. Only a few academic journal articles may be referred, alongside books and reliable online sources.
|
Good analysis and / or argument. Evidence of some critical thought with a well- developed argument.
|
Good organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument). Good English with appropriate referencing and bibliography.
|
|
50-59
|
Satisfactory reading and reasonable knowledge. There may be little reference to academic journal articles, and the reading may be limited to textbooks and online sources.
|
Adequate analysis and / or argument. Little evidence of critical thought in the analysis (or argument). The argument may be largely one-sided.
|
Satisfactory organisation & presentation, with much scope for improvement.
Adequate level of English with several grammatical mistakes. Satisfactory, yet inconsistent referencing.
|
|
40-49
|
Limited reading and incomplete knowledge. Several unreliable online sources used.
|
Limited awareness of the topic. Very superficial analysis or argument.
|
Limited effort in organisation & presentation. Inadequate level of English language and limited effort to use a proper referencing style.
|
|
<40
|
Poor level of reading and failure to demonstrate competent knowledge.
Several unreliable online sources used.
|
Poor and unacceptable awareness of the topic. Failure to demonstrate competent understanding. Lack of thought and/or confused or irrelevant argument.
|
Lack of organisation & presentation. Substantial errors in English and very poor or absent referencing and bibliography.
|
Resit Assessment 2 – 24 hr Take away paper (70%)
Link to Module Learning Outcomes
The TAP links to learning objectives one and three. Specifically the TAP requests students demonstrate a critical understanding of well-established principles of public management and relevant theories and approaches to public management; and demonstrate the ability to deploy key frameworks, methods and tools to analyse different types of public organisations.
Description
- The TAP is an essay-format assessment focusing on concepts from Public Management.
- You will have 24 hours to complete the exam and submit your answers.
- There will be two questions, students must answer both questions.
- You must submit a maximum of 500 words for each answer, and no more than 1000 words in total.
Preparation
- Students need to revise the lectures content and related readings.
- Seminars are useful in reinforcing and developing knowledge for the module.
- Independent revision is essential to prepare for the TAP.
- Reading through and practicing with past papers under exam conditions is also strongly recommended.
Support
- A revision session will be provided in week 11. This session will begin with an overview of practical tips for dealing with the paper before going through a mock paper with students.
Marking Criteria
The marking criteria for this TAP can be found below:
|
Mark
|
Reading & Knowledge 40% Mark Descriptor
|
Analysis & Argument 40% Mark Descriptor
|
Organisation 20% Mark Descriptor
|
|
70+
|
Evidence of extensive reading and exceptionally comprehensive knowledge, demonstrated through accurate
and detailed answer.
|
Evidence of Outstanding critical and analytical assessment of the topic with clear evidence of independent and original
thought.
|
Outstanding organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
|
|
60-69
|
Evidence of Good range of reading and good knowledge indicated in generally accurate and near complete answer.
|
Evidence of good analysis and / or argument with some critical thought and a well-developed argument.
|
Evidence of good organisation & presentation of the analysis (or argument).
|
|
50-59
|
Evidence of satisfactory reading and reasonable knowledge.
|
Evidence of adequate analysis and / or argument. Little evidence of critical thought in the analysis (or argument) or an
imbalanced argument.
|
Evidence of satisfactory organisation & presentation, with much scope for improvement.
|
|
40-49
|
Evidence of only a limited reading and incomplete knowledge.
|
Evidence of limited awareness of the topic. Very superficial analysis or argument.
|
Evidence of limited effort in organisation & presentation.
|
|
<40
|
Evidence of a poor level of reading and failure to demonstrate competent knowledge.
|
Evidence of a poor and unacceptable awareness of the topic. Failure to demonstrate competent understanding. Lack of thought and/or confusion.
|
Evidence of a lack of organisation & presentation.
|
Writing Well and Avoiding Academic Misconduct
- Plagiarism, collusion, and cheating in exams are all forms of academic misconduct which the University takes very seriously.
- Every year, some students commit academic misconduct unintentionally because they did not know what was expected of them. The consequences for committing academic misconduct can be severe, so it is important that you familiarise yourself with what it is and how to avoid it.
- The University’s Skills Hub guide to study skills gives advice on writing well, including hints and tips on how to avoid making serious mistakes. You will also find helpful guides to referencing properly and improving your critical writing skills. Make use of the resources there.
- If you are dealing with difficult circumstances, such as illness or bereavement, do not try to rush your work or hand in something which may be in breach of the rules. Instead you should seek confidential advice from the Student Life Centre. The full University rules on academic misconduct are set out in the Examination and Assessment Regulations Handbook.
- If you do not think that you should be taking this assessment, or if you have any additional questions, please get in touch as soon as possible.
Marking Process and Ensuring Marking Fairness
- The University takes several steps to ensure marking fairness.
- Assessment Convening: The module convenor is usually the lead marker, designs the assessment, and specifies the marking criteria.
- Calibration: When there are several markers:
- They calibrate their marking expectations and scale, usually in a meeting before the marking begins. They usually mark a few submissions together and discuss the characteristic of poor to excellent works using the marking criteria.
- The module convenor checks the marks and distributions by each marker to ensure similarity and fairness across groups. By analysing the data, any unexplained anomalies are identified and compensated.
- Moderation: A sample of the marked submissions/scripts (including some from each mark classification) is then looked at by a moderator to confirm the accuracy of the marking (if they feel there is a problem they may recommend a third person to review all scripts).
- External Examination: The sample is then sent to an external examiner to confirm that the marking has been appropriate and internal procedures have been followed.
- Finally, a Module Assessment Board (MAB) then considers the overall distribution of marks, taking into account any complaints or problems raised concerning each module, and a Progression and Award Board (PAB) agrees awards for successful candidates and resit/sit opportunities for failed modules/assessments.
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
tailored to your instructions