College of Business and Law
ACADEMIC YEAR 2023/24
Assessment Brief
Submission
College of Business and Law
ACADEMIC YEAR 2023/24
Assessment Brief
Submission and feedback dates
Submission deadline: Before 14:00 on Tuesday 17th September 2024.
This assessment is eligible for 48-hour late submission window.
Marks and Feedback due: 17th October 2024.
N.B. all times are 24-hour clock, current local time (at time of submission) in the UK.
Submission details
Module title and code:UMSDXJ-60_M Research Project Module: MSc IM
Assessment type:Project
Assessment title:Written conclusions and recommendations
Assessment weighting:40% of total module mark
Size or length of assessment: 2000 – 3000 words
Module learning outcomes assessed by this task:
MO5: Evidence deep understanding of, and ability to reflect critically on, chosen research approach, process and feedback.
MO6: Critically analyse data and consider the significance of the research findings to produce practical conclusions and recommendations.
Completing your assessment
What am I required to do on this assessment?
Write an academic paper, which presents the following:
1. The key findings of your research project
2. Conclusions
3. Recommendations for practice
4. Recommendations for further research.
In forming your conclusions and recommendations, you should refer to relevant theory and extant research on your topic.
Where should I start?
The two-weekly research project workshops and associated workbook are designed to support you in analysing your data, drawing conclusions and making recommendations. Make sure you attend these workshops and complete the tasks in the module workbook before each session.
Please also refer to the feedback that your mentor has given you on the portfolio tasks, and make sure that you arrange a final meeting with your mentor to discuss the feedback from your critical discussion.
The module team runs drop-in clinics throughout August, in which you can discuss and get feedback on your conclusions and recommendations. Make sure that you attend at least one of these.
What do I need to do to pass?
You must achieve a minimum of 50% in this task to pass.
How do I achieve high marks in this assessment?
Engaging with the workshops, workbook and feedback from the Critical discussion examiners and mentor feedback will help you to achieve high marks in this assessment. The criteria for each level of attainment are given in the marking grid at the end of this brief.
How does the learning and teaching relate to the assessment?
This assessment does not stand alone – you will find it much easier to develop your conclusions and recommendations if you have based your research project on the principles covered throughout the workshop programme. All workshop sessions and workbook tasks are related to this assessment as follows:
1. Outline of theoretical underpinnings: workshops 1 – 3.
Understanding how to develop clear theoretical underpinning to your work will help you to relate your research findings back to the literature.
2. Project definition and approach: workshops 4 – 5
If your project is defined well, you will find it easier to analyse and interpret your data and to identify clear conclusions.
3. Methodology poster and ethics form: workshops 5 – 8
Understanding the methodology that you have used to collect data will give you insights into the importance and the limitations of your findings.
4. Data evidence and analysis plan: Workshops: 8 – 10
Understanding your analysis methods will give you insights into the importance and limitations of your findings.
5. The critical discussion: workshop 11
You should use the feedback from your critical discussion to improve your written submission.
6. Conclusions and recommendations: Conclusions clinics 1 – 3
These are drop-in sessions where you can ask for advice and gain feedback on your ideas for the written submission.
What additional resources may help me complete this assessment?
• Attending all five meetings with your mentor.
• Assessments tab on Blackboard.
• Formative feedback on draft presentation plan in tutorials.
• Module Leader’s office hours as per Blackboard.
• The UWE Library Study Skills pages for online support and bookable workshops.
• Learning Hub’s bookable workshops.
• Guidance on using UWE’s Library FAQs and other resources on your Blackboard site.
• Specific UWE library study skills pages i.e. https://www.uwe.ac.uk/study/study-support/study-skills.
What do I do if I am concerned about completing this assessment?
UWE Bristol offer a range of Assessment Support Options that you can explore through this link, and both Academic Support and Wellbeing Support are available.
For further information, please see the Academic Survival Guide.
How do I avoid an Assessment Offence on this module? 2
Use the support above if you feel unable to submit your own work for this module.
Speak to the Module Leader or your tutor if you have any queries about the suitability of sources or the work you are producing.
Ethics approval: this must be granted by your supervisor before data is collected. Failure to submit the online ethics form with your supervisor will be considered an automatic assessment offence. This work will not be marked if an online ethics form is not submitted, or if any data collection activity was not signed off at the ethics approval stage, or if any data collection activity breaches university ethics guidelines.
Criteria
Met
Not met
Ethics
Clear plans for data privacy/protection, informed consent, opportunity to withdraw, anonymity and confidentiality are outlined. Ethics approval was granted before data collection.
Ethics approval not granted before data collection. Any breach of this ethics approval. Lack of clarity about plans for data privacy/protection, informed consent, opportunity to withdraw, anonymity and/or confidentiality
Criteria
PASS
Exceptional
(80-100)
PASS
Excellent
(70-79)
PASS
Good /Very good
(60-69)
PASS
Satisfactory
(needs some improvement)
(50-59)
MARGINAL FAIL
(Failed to meet some criteria)
(45-49)
FAIL
(Failed to meet a number of criteria)
(0-44)
Data analysis
Analysis linked to research objectives.
Sophistication of analysis methods and fit with research approach.
Sophistication of the analysis
Correct use of methods
Understanding of limitations.
(30% of submission)
You have analysed your data very rigorously, focusing your analysis on your research objectives. You have used sophisticated analytical methods that are appropriate to the research approach. There are no errors in your analysis. You have shown a deep and comprehensive understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of your data and of your analysis process.
You have analysed your data rigorously, focusing your analysis on your research objectives. You have used advanced analytical methods that are appropriate to your research approach. There are no significant errors in your analysis. You have shown a clear understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of your data and of your analysis process.
You have analysed your data comprehensively, making clear links between your analysis and your research objectives. You have used sound analytical methods that are appropriate to your research approach. There are only minor errors in your analysis. You have considered the strengths and weakness of your data and your analysis process.
You have made little attempt to prioritise your analysis in line with your research objectives, presenting largely generic data analysis. Your analysis methods are basic, albeit appropriate to the research approach. There are a few important errors in your analysis, though it is largely correct. You have given little consideration to the strengths and weaknesses of your data and your analysis process, though this has been attempted.
You have made no attempt to prioritise your analysis in line with your research objectives, presenting only generic data analysis. Your analysis methods are not clear or are not appropriate to your research approach. There are major errors in your analysis. You have presented no meaningful reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of your data or the analysis process.
You have presented little analysis of the data you have collected, and/or little evidence of having collected any appropriate data. Your analysis methods are not clear or are not appropriate to your research approach. Most of the analysis is incorrect. You have made no attempt to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of your data or the analysis process.
Discussion and conclusions
• Placing findings in context of literature
• Clarity of conclusions relating to research questions and/or objectives.
• Rigour and objectivity in considering evidence relating to the research questions and/or objectives.
• Strength of reasoning relating to research questions and/or objectives.
(30% of submission)
You discuss your findings in relation to the prior literature, indicating clearly and comprehensively where you have supported, contradicted or contributed to previous research. You show a critical understanding of your research focus, approach and context in comparison to previous research.
You present clear, comprehensive and insightful conclusions in relation to your research questions and/or objectives.
You support your conclusions with a comprehensive and objective review of the evidence from your own findings and from previous research.
You support your conclusions with compelling reasoning and/or supporting opinion from the literature.
You discuss your findings in relation to the prior literature, indicating clearly and where you have supported, contradicted or contributed to previous research. You show a good understanding of your research focus, approach and context in comparison to previous research.
You present clear and comprehensive conclusions in relation to your research questions and/or objectives.
You support your conclusions with an objective review of the evidence from your own findings and from previous research.
You support your conclusions with persuasive reasoning and/or supporting opinion from the literature.
You discuss your findings in relation to the prior literature, indicating where you have supported, contradicted or contributed to previous research. You show some understanding of your research focus, approach and context in comparison to previous research.
You present clear and comprehensive conclusions in relation to your research questions and/or objectives.
You support your conclusions with a review of the evidence from your own findings and from previous research.
You support your conclusions with clear reasoning and/or supporting opinion from the literature.
You make some links between your findings and the prior literature, identifying instances where you have supported, contradicted or contributed to previous research.
You present conclusions in relation to your research questions and/or objectives.
You support your conclusions with some evidence from your own research.
You support your conclusions with some valid reasoning and/or credible opinion.
The findings are weakly linked to prior literature and no further relevant sources identified. The findings are discussed in general, with few to specific outcomes highlighted.
You make little reference to your research questions or objectives.
You present little evidence to support your conclusions, or the evidence is very weak.
The reasoning supporting your conclusions is flawed and/or the opinion is not credible/relevant.
The findings are only occasionally linked to prior literature and no further relevant sources identified. The findings are discussed in general, failing to explore specific outcomes.
You make no reference to your research questions or objectives.
You present no valid evidence to support your conclusions.
You present no valid reasoning to support your conclusions.
Recommendations
– Engagement with theory and/or practice
-Relevance, novelty and realism of recommendations for practice
-Relevance, novelty and realism of recommendations for further research
(30% of submission)
You offer creative, original and workable ideas for future research topics that stem clearly from your own study or your refection on its limitations. Your recommendations directly address important knowledge gaps or debates in the extant research.
You make comprehensive, detailed, innovative and realistic recommendations for practice linked clearly to your research findings.
You offer detailed and workable ideas for future research topics that stem clearly from your own study or your refection on its limitations. Your recommendations address knowledge gaps or debates in the extant research.
You make comprehensive, detailed and realistic recommendations for practice linked clearly to your research findings.
You offer specific, clear and workable ideas for future research topics that stem clearly from your own study or your refection on its limitations. Your recommendations are related clearly to the extant literature.
You make detailed and realistic recommendations for practice, linked to your research findings.
You make some specific suggestions for further research with some links to the extant literature.
You make some specific and realistic recommendations for practice, linked to your research findings.
Your recommendations for further research are very general and/or are not realistic. Your recommendations are not related to the extant literature.
Your recommendations for practice very general and/or are not realistic. Your recommendations for practice are not linked to your research findings.
You make not clear recommendations for further research, or those that you do make bear no relationship to your study.
You make no clear recommendations for practice, or those that you do make bear no relationship to your study.
Critical reflection on methodology
-identification of issues affecting the research
-suggestions for future research methodologies
(10% of submission)
You discuss the factors affecting the robustness of the data and analysis comprehensively and in depth, developing insightful conclusions about the value and limitations of your study. You make comprehensive and appropriate suggestions of alternative/additional research methods that would address these limitations.
You discuss many of the factors affecting the robustness of the data and analysis comprehensively, developing clear conclusions about the value and limitations of your study. You make appropriate suggestions of alternative/additional research methods that would address these limitations.
You discuss some of the factors affecting the robustness of the data and analysis, developing conclusions about the limitations of your study. You make appropriate suggestions of alternative/additional research methods that would address these limitations.
You give some evaluation of the robustness of your study and make some suggestions of alternative/additional research methods that would address these limitations, or those suggested are not specific to your study/evaluation.
You identify only generic limitations with little adaptation to reflect on this particular study. You do not propose any suggestions of alternative/additional research methods that would address these limitations, or those suggested are not specific to your evaluation.
You do not present a valid evaluation you’re your study. You do not provide any sensible suggestions for alternative methods that could have been used.
Marks and Feedback
Your assessment will be marked according to the following marking criteria.
You can use these to evaluate your own work before you submit.
1. In line with UWE Bristol’s Assessment Content Limit Policy (formerly the Word Count Policy), word count includes all text, including (but not limited to): the main body of text (including headings), all citations (both in and out of brackets), text boxes, tables and graphs, figures and diagrams, quotes, lists.
2. UWE Bristol’s UWE’s Assessment Offences Policy requires that you submit work that is entirely your own and reflects your own learning, so it is important to:
• Ensure you reference all sources used, using the UWE Harvard/OSCOLA system and the guidance available on UWE’s Study Skills referencing pages.
• Avoid copying and pasting any work into this assessment, including your own previous assessments, work from other students or internet sources
• Develop your own style, arguments and wording, so avoid copying sources and changing individual words but keeping, essentially, the same sentences and/or structures from other sources
• Never give your work to others who may copy it
• If an individual assessment, develop your own work and preparation, and do not allow anyone to make amends on your work (including proof-readers, who may highlight issues but not edit the work) and
When submitting your work, you will be required to confirm that the work is your own, and text-matching software and other methods are routinely used to check submissions against other submissions to the university and internet sources. Details of what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it can be found on UWE’s Study Skills pages about avoiding plagiarism.