Individual Assignment Requirements

Individual Assignment Requirements
Assessment Criteria
Suggested word limit: 1000 words (±10%)
Component Weighting: 20%
Due Date: 5pm Friday Week 6
Submission format: Soft copy of a Word.docx to be uploaded on Blackboard through ‘Assignments and due dates’ menu
Important Please note:
1. Any assignments where plagiarism or collusion is detected will be awarded a mark of zero. You will need to contact your tutor if you wish to discuss this.
2. Failure to upload the correct document or format to the assessment link will result in late penalties being applied to documents which are later submitted for marking of that assignment.
3. SafeAssign takes at least 24 hours to return a report. If you wish to check your assignment prior to submission, please allow plenty of time to use the self-check before the final submission deadline arrives; SafeAssign not returning a self-check report WILL NOT be considered a valid reason for an extension.
Assessment Description
For weeks 3, 4 and 5, e-Learning materials have been uploaded to Blackboard (see ‘E-learning Activities’ menu for these weekly activities) for review and application.
Based on the online clips and the theories they cover, critically evaluate their relevance to the Higher Education industry over the past 30 years. To support your evaluation, for each clip provide specific examples of organisations in the HE Industry which have been successful in their application of these theories, and others who have not.
HI6006 Competitive Strategy – Trimester 3 2017 1
Recommended Structure
For each theory (300 words):
• Provide a brief description of the theory and its relevance to the HE Sector.
• Provide an example of where an organisation/institution has successfully adopted a strategy aligned to that particular clip and an example of where an organisation has not been successful, missed an opportunity or would have benefitted from taking a different approach.
• Your report requires an introduction and conclusion
Assessment Guidelines
Students should consult the marking rubric (see below) to see exactly what is required and how your assignment will be marked.
You should enrich this assignment with ideas from other materials such as journal articles. This additional research will be necessary to obtain the best marks.
All ideas in the report must be referenced using Harvard Referencing (intext citations and full references at the back).
HI6006 Competitive Strategy – Trimester 3 2017 2
Group Report
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Application of selected theory to industry sector and evidence of synthesis
(8 marks) No evidence of any synthesis between argument, theory and/or
examples
Limited evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or
examples
Some evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples within defined
context
Clear evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples within context. Contextual issues have been identified and discussed Clear evidence of synthesis between argument, theory and/or examples within context. Contextual issues have been identified, discussed and critically evaluated
Quality of argument / Use of theory with examples (6 marks)
No justification of opinions or position taken. Unsupported by
theory and/or examples.
Limited argument supported by seminal theory and/or
examples
Clear argument supported by relevant theories. Examples used to support
and explore argument
Clear, balanced argument supported by a broad range of relevant theories. Theories and examples
evaluated and selection justified
Clear, balanced evaluative argument supported by a broad range of relevant theories.
Theories and examples critically evaluated and selection justified
Quality and justification
of conclusions
(2 marks)
No conclusion or conclusion unsupported by argument
Safe and predictable conclusions that answer the question.
Some evidence of original thought and insight.
Good evidence of original thought and insight. Introduction of innovative models /theories Good evidence of original thought and insight.
Development and evaluation
of innovative models
/theories
Quantity and quality and presentation of references using Harvard Referencing throughout including in-text citations
(2 marks)
Only 0, 1 or 2 relevant references given.
Referencing is unclear. At least 3 relevant references. Referencing mostly clear but inconsistent. At least 5 relevant references given, mainly drawn from provided sources e.g lectures. Clear systematic referencing of all sources. throughout the report. At least 7 relevant
references including at least 5 from own research including page no’s for all articles Bibliography includes at least 10 relevant references from good sources i.e. journals rather than internet/social media. Very clearly presented.
Professional Report
Formatting, Structure and
approach (2 marks)
Poorly presented, no apparent structure and/or confused writing style Limited attempt at formatting, Well structured, clear writing style Page numbering, front cover, bibliography with some attempt at formatting. Well structured, focus explicit and clear, style appropriate Good attempt at report formatting incorporating all elements at credits level. Clear focus, structure and style used to emphasise discussion Excellent attempt at formatting report. Focus clear and justified, structure and style used to emphasise argument and discussion