7052CRB Leading and Creating Organisational Health and Wellbeing CWK Assignment Brief

Marks Below 40%: Poor down to Irrelevant

Marks in the range 40– 49%: Adequate

Marks in the range 50– 59%: Good

Marks in the range 60– 69%: Very Good

Marks 70% and above: Excellent to outstanding

OVERALL (40%)

This work does not meet

An adequate ability to

A commitment to meeting

Evidence of a competent level of work. Task requirements met, but there is the suggestion that some further work could be beneficial. There is clear evidence of a desire to master the tasks defined within the analysis. The focus of the analysis is clearly grounded in the case study interview. The use of CMI and module- related resources is clear.

Articulate and generally persuasive levels of

the task requirements of the

meet the task

the task requirements set

work. The task requirements are fully met and

assignment. The work

requirements but perhaps

within the analysis. Task

perhaps exceeded. There is clear evidence of

demonstrates little or no

only marginally, and

requirements are met,

an ability to master the tasks defined within the

understanding of the

without confidence. A

but not always

analysis. The focus of the analysis is clearly

analysis, and little insight

great deal of further work

confidently. The work

grounded in the case study interview. The use

into the content of the

is required, and some

may display some

of CMI and module- related resources is fully

module or task. At lower

aspects of the analysis

misunderstandings and

evidenced.

grades, the analysis is not

appear to be

flaws in the thought

grounded in the case study

misunderstood.

process. The analysis is

interview. CMI and module

The analysis is partially

partially grounded in the

related resources are not

grounded in the case

case study interview. The

evident.

study interview. The use

use of CMI and module-

of CMI and module-

related resources is

related resources are

limited but still evident.

limited.

Introduction (est.

Does not adequately

Some attempt to address

Generally addresses

Addresses the section

Fully addresses the section throughout; the

100 word)

address the section; the

the section but with

the section but with

appropriately; the

introduction has appropriate detail.

introduction is minimal, non-

significant irrelevance; the

some irrelevance; the

introduction has mostly

existent, or irrelevant.

introduction may not have

introduction may only

appropriate detail.

appropriate or relevant

have partly

detail.

appropriate detail.

Marks Below 40%: Poor down to Irrelevant

Marks in the range 40– 49%: Adequate

Marks in the range 50– 59%: Good

Marks in the range 60– 69%: Very Good

Marks 70% and above: Excellent to outstanding

Leadership (est.

Does not adequately

Some attempt to address

Generally, addresses

Addresses the section

Fully addresses the section throughout; the

600 words)

address the section;

the section but with

the section but with

appropriately; the analysis

analysis is developed and supported with fully

evidence is irrelevant or

significant irrelevance; the

some irrelevance; the

is mostly developed, and

appropriate evidence. Excellent evidence of

absent. No evidence of

analysis is undeveloped or

analysis is only partly

evidence is generally

leadership model/theory with excellent links to

leadership models/theories

only weakly supported.

developed or

appropriate. Good

case study

Some evidence of

supported. Some

evidence of leadership

leadership

evidence of

models/theory and links

models/theories

leadership

with case study.

models/theories with

some links to case

study.

Health and Well- being (est. 400 words)

Does not adequately address the section; evidence is irrelevant or absent. No evidence of health and wellbeing strategies/ ‘best

practice’

Some attempt to address the section but with significant irrelevance; the analysis is undeveloped or only weakly supported.

Some evidence of health

and wellbeing

Generally, addresses the section but with some irrelevance; the analysis is only partly developed or supported. Some evidence of health and

wellbeing strategies/’best

Addresses the section appropriately; the analysis is mostly developed, and evidence is generally appropriate, and are clearly linked to the case study.

Good evidence of health

The analysis is developed and supported with fully appropriate evidence and are clearly linked to the case study. Excellent evidence of health and wellbeing

strategies/’best practice’ and links with case study.

strategies/’best practice’

practice with some links to case study.

and wellbeing strategies/’best practice

and links with case study.

Marks Below 40%:

Poor down to Irrelevant

Marks in the range 40– 49%: Adequate

Marks in the range 50– 59%: Good

Marks in the range 60– 69%: Very Good

Marks 70% and above: Excellent to outstanding

Diversity (est.

Does not adequately

Some attempt to

Generally, addresses

Addresses the section

Fully addresses the section throughout;

400 words)

address the section:

address the section

the section but with

appropriately, the

the analysis is developed and supported

evidence is irrelevant

but with significant

some irrelevance: the

analysis is mostly

with fully appropriate evidence, clearly

or absent. No

irrelevance; the

analysis is only partly

developed, and evidence

linked to the case study. Excellent

evidence of relevant

analysis is

developed or

is generally appropriate,

evidence of relevant legislation and ‘best

legislation and ‘best

undeveloped or only

supported. Some

and is clearly linked to

practice’ with relevant links to case study

practice’

weakly supported.

evidence of relevant

the case study.

Some evidence of

legislation and ‘best

Good evidence of relevant

relevant legislation

practice’ relating to

legislation and ‘best

and ‘best

the case study.

practice’ relating to the

practice’

case study.

Marks Below 40%: Poor down to Irrelevant

Marks in the range 40– 49%: Adequate

Marks in the range 50– 59%: Good

Marks in the range 60– 69%: Very Good

Marks 70% and above: Excellent to outstanding

Plus an additional 5% for Overall presentation and application of Referencing and Citations

Sources are entirely inappropriate, or no references are given, or use of sources and referencing are completely inadequate. Little or no logical structure. Argument very unclear or unintelligible. Grasp of language inadequate for the task.

Limited use of CMI and module-related academic sources, partly inappropriate; referencing has many serious errors; quotation and paraphrase not usually

distinguishable or there may be excessive

quotation. Structure between and within

Use of CMI and module- related academic materials is evidenced in some sections.Referencing has many errors; quotation and paraphrase sometimes not distinguishable or there may be over-reliance on quotation. Structure between and within paragraphs and sections shows mixture of strengths and weaknesses.

Argument only partly language adequate, but limited in range, with errors occasionally impeding message.

Good range of appropriate CMI and module-related academic materials, all referenced, though with a few errors; quotation and paraphrase are usually clearly distinguishable.

Mostly logical structure between and within paragraphs and sections. Argument mostly coherent.

Generally good control and range of language, though with a few errors not usually impeding message.

Wide range of appropriate Module-related CMI sources accurately referenced, (any errors are minor and occasional), quotation and paraphrase fully distinguishable. Fully logical structure between and within paragraphs and sections. Fully coherent argument. Excellent control and range of appropriate language; only minor impede message.

paragraphs and sections

shows significant

weaknesses. Argument

unclear. Quite weak

control and very limited

language range, with

frequent errors impeding

message.

Marks Below 40%

Marks in the range 41– 49%

Marks in the range 50– 59%

Marks in the range 60– 69%

Marks 70% and above

OVERALL (40%)

This work does not meet

An adequate ability to

A commitment to

Evidence of a competent

Articulate and generally persuasive levels of

the task requirements of

meet the task

meeting the task

level of work. Task

work. The task requirements are fully met and

the assignment. The work

requirements but perhaps

requirements set within

requirements met, but

perhaps exceeded. There is clear evidence of

demonstrates little or no

only marginally, and

the analysis. Task

there is the suggestion

an ability to master the tasks defined within the

understanding of the

without confidence. A

requirements are met,

that some further work

analysis. The focus of the analysis is clearly

analysis, and the

great deal of further work

but not always

could be beneficial. There

grounded in the case study. The

recommendations provide

is required, and some

confidently. The work

is clear evidence of a

recommendations are realistic and justified.

little insight into the

aspects of the analysis

may display some

desire to master the tasks

The use of CMI and module- related resources

content of the module or

and recommendations

misunderstandings and

defined within the analysis.

is fully evidenced.

task. At lower grades, the

appear

flaws in the thought

The focus of the analysis

recommendations are not

to be misunderstood. The

process. The analysis

and recommendations are

grounded in the case

analysis is partially

and recommendations

clearly grounded in the

study analysis. CMI and

grounded in the case

are partially grounded in

case study. The use of

module- related resources

study. The use of CMI and

the case study. The use

CMI and module related

are not evident.

module-related resources

of CMI and module-

resources is clear.

are limited.

related resources is

limited but still evident.

Recommendations

Does not adequately

Some attempt to address

Generally, addresses the

Addresses the section

Fully addresses the section throughout; the

(est. 300 words)

address the section; the

the section but with

section but with some

appropriately, the

recommendations are developed, justified and

recommendations are

significant irrelevance; the

irrelevance; the

recommendations are

supported with fully appropriate evidence, and is

irrelevant or absent.

recommendations are

recommendations are only

mostly developed and

clearly linked to the case study.

undeveloped or only

partly developed or

justified. Evidence is

weakly supported and are

supported, and justification

generally appropriate and

not justified.

is limited.

is clearly linked to the case

study.

Marks Below 40%

Marks in the range 41– 49%

Marks in the range 50– 59%

Marks in the range 60– 69%

Marks 70% and above

Quality of Work

i.e. leaflet

Largely incoherent and inconsistent, the work fails to reach a satisfactory standard in concept, delivery, research, planning and use of appropriate technologies within the context of the module and task.

May lack coherence and consistency. Generally, of a weak standard in concept, delivery, research, planning and use of appropriate technologies, and with significant failures in many of these areas within the context of the module and task.

Generally coherent and consistent as a set of linked resources. Of a satisfactory standard in concept, delivery, research, planning and use of appropriate technologies, but these may

be under-developed or inconsistent within the context of the module

and task.

Formally coherent and consistent as a set of linked resources in form and content. Of a very good or good standard in concept, delivery, research, and planning, and use of appropriate technologies within the context of the module and task.

Fully coherent and consistent as a set of linked resources. An excellent to outstanding standard in concept, delivery, research, and planning, with sophisticated use of appropriate technologies within the context of the module and task.

Conceptual/narrative

The interlinking narrative

The interlinking narrative

The interlinking

The interlinking

The interlinking narrative

progression

between components is

between components is

narrative between

narrative between

between components is very

almost entirely absent

unclear or inconsistent,

components is clear and

components is very

clear and consistent, with

with significant flaws or

with flaws or omissions in

consistent, with limited

clear and consistent,

no flaws or omissions in

omissions in text,

text, headlines, and other

flaws or omissions in

with minor flaws or

text, headlines, and other

headlines, and other

relevant supporting

text, headlines, and

omissions in text,

relevant supporting

relevant supporting

material.

other relevant

headlines, and other

material within the context

material.

supporting material

relevant supporting

of the module and the task.

within the context of the

material within the

module

context of the module

and task.

Marks Below 40%

Marks in the range 41– 49%

Marks in the range 50– 59%

Marks in the range 60– 69%

Marks 70% and above

Critical awareness

No or very limited understanding of relevant topics ie health and wellbeing,

diversity and leadership, and the academic background to these topics.

Definitions and models are entirely absent.

The student is unable to identify how the ideas presented were developed.

Recommendations not

relevant or justified. No link to case study.

Limited understanding of relevant topics i.e., health and wellbeing, diversity and leadership and the academic background to these topics. Definitions and models are largely absent. The student is unable to clearly identify how the ideas presented. were developed.

Recommendations

vague and unjustified. Not relevant to case study.

Some understanding of relevant topics i.e. health and wellbeing, diversity and leadership, and the academic background to these topics. Definitions and models are present. The student is able to identify how the ideas presented were developed.

but without confidence. Some recommendations with some justification and some relevance to the case study.

An understanding of relevant topics ie health and wellbeing, diversity and leadership, and the academic background to these topics is evidenced.

Definitions and models are present.

The student is able to identify how the ideas presented were developed within the context of the module and the task.

Good relevant recommendations with good justification and relevant to the case study.

A clear understanding of relevant topics ie health and

wellbeing, diversity and leadership and the academic background to these topics is evidenced.

Definitions and models are present throughout. The student is able to clearly identify how the ideas presented were developed, within the context of the module and the task.

Excellent recommendations, clearly justified and relevance to the case study.

Marks Below 40%

Marks in the range 41– 49%

Marks in the range 50– 59%

Marks in the range 60– 69%

Marks 70% and above

Plus, an additional 5% Referencing and Citations in and where applicable, in the main content.

Sources are entirely inappropriate, or no references are given, or use of sources and referencing are completely inadequate. CMI and module related academic materials are not referenced. Little or no logical structure.

Argument very unclear or unintelligible.

Limited range of sources, partly inappropriate; referencing has many serious errors. Use of CMI and module- related academic materials is limited. Quite weak control and very limited language range.

Use of CMI and module- related academic materials is evidenced in some sections.

Referencing has many errors. Control of language adequate.

Good range of appropriate sources, all referenced, though with a few errors; quotation and paraphrase are usually clearly distinguishable. Use of CMI and module- related academic materials are

generally evidenced. Generally good control and range of language.

Wide range of appropriate sources accurately referenced, (any errors are minor and occasional), Relevant Module- related CMI materials are used throughout.

Excellent control

and range of

appropriate language.

Criterion\Level

Below 30%

30 - 39%

40 - 49%

50 - 59%

60 - 69%

70% +

Overall (10%)

The personal and professional account is irrelevant to student and/or course learning goals. The account relates to the case study.

Most of the personal and professional account is irrelevant to student and/or course learning goals.

Student makes attempts to demonstrate relevance of the personal and professional account, but the relevance is unclear to the reader.

The personal and professional account is largely relevant and meaningful to student and course learning goals.

The personal and professional account is relevant and meaningful to student and course learning goals.

The personal and professional account is relevant and meaningful and well substantiated to student and course learning goals.

Clarity

Language is unclear and confusing throughout. Concepts are not discussed.

Language is unclear and confusing throughout. Concepts are either not discussed or are presented inaccurately.

There are frequent lapses in clarity and accuracy. There is a limited attempt to explain abstract concepts with some accuracy.

Explanation of concepts makes little to an uninformed reader.

Minor, infrequent lapses in clarity and accuracy. There is some attempt to explain abstract concepts with some accuracy.

Explanation of concepts makes limited sense to an uninformed reader.

Minor, infrequent lapses in clarity and accuracy. Abstract concepts are explained with some accuracy.

Explanation of concepts makes some sense to an uninformed reader.

The language is clear and expressive. The reader can create a mental picture of the personal and professional account being described.

Abstract concepts are explained accurately.

Explanation of concepts makes sense to an

uninformed reader.