BUS148511 Transformational Leadership and Development Individual A1 Poster Presentation

Grad Assessment Criteria

Fail

Marginal Fail

Pass

Commendation

Distinction

Distinction

Low | Mid

Pass | Mid | High

Commendation | Mid | High

Distinction | Mid | High

Exceptional

(1) Layout and Style (20%):

Appropriate style/

/structure; clear concise VERBAL language & appropriate formatting & evidence based referencing. Demonstrate effective presentation communication skills (J)

Totally inadequate A1 Poster layout; muddled structure. Inability to communicate ideas. No referencing.

Poor A1 Poster layout, muddled structure. Inability to communicate ideas. Little or inconsistent referencing.

Satisfactory A1 Poster layout of and verbal communication. Some consistent referencing.   Some weaknesses and lacks clarity.

Good A1 Poster structure and style of A1 and verbal delivery (engaging and stimulating), with good referencing and complete reference lists.

Also provides supportive handouts with explanation

Excellent A1 Poster structure and layout of slides. Clearly identified and headed sections and sub-sections, complete reference lists and good referencing. Excellent  communication of salient points, that ensured a professional and stimulating presentation verbally and with skilful use of A1 Poster and supportive handouts for crafting arguments.

The verbal presentation and A1 Poster and supportive handouts ensured a style and structure of consultancy standard.

Outstanding use of A1 Poster layout, structure & format, supported by appropriate handouts, referencing and significant evidence based arguments with a high level of critical debate and analysis.

Almost seamless verbal communication of key points.

(2) Evaluation (30%):

Relevant theoretical /concepts with academic underpinning to achieve critical evaluation; Knowledge of tools of sustainable/ethical management and critical application to the case study in a business and organisational context.

Plus demonstrated understanding/ appreciation of social, economic and environmental sustainability issues, and SDGs issues as directed by the brief. Overall explanation and justification Ethical, Independence, Governance aligned to  Codes of Practice and Professional Conduct

Very weak application; very few tools selected or defined for sustainable/ethical  management.

No recognition of purpose of tools used.

Lack of understanding on how to implement sustainable ethical tools, models or concepts.

No example(s)/ application to context/ company/case study.

Very weak appreciation of social, economic and environmental sustainability and SDGs issues. Omission of any ethical dilemma or associated analysis

Weak application; some selected and defined tools, concepts and models for sustainable/ ethical  management. Demonstrates very little understanding on how to implement the sustainable  and ethical

Very limited or no example(s) and application to a professional context/ company/case study of

sustainability, ethics, and independence and alignment to practice.

Sufficient application; some selected and defined concepts, models and tools for sustainable ethical management. Some recognition of purpose of approaches applied to profession and discipline. Some limited (lacking critique)e example(s) and application to a context/ company/ case study. Sufficient appreciation and coverage of social, economic and environmental sustainability and SDGs issues within the context of selection and justification case study and profession. The ethical dilemma and aspects of independence and governance aligned to profession and discipline were well covered.

Good application; selected and defined tools, concepts and models for sustainable  and ethical management. Moderate.

.Reasonable example(s) and application to the given context/company/case study.

Good appreciation of social, economic and environmental sustainability and SDGs issues within the context of selection and justification of appropriate approaches to enhance sustainable credentials

A good appraisal of ethical performance and critical debate of ethical dilemma, independence and governance related to profession and discipline via consideration to ethical codes or practice, regulation and standards.

Excellent application; selected and defined tools, concepts and models for sustainable  and ethical management. Moderate.

Robust example(s) and application to the given context/company/case study.

Very Good appreciation of social, economic and environmental sustainability and SDGs issues within the context of selection and justification of appropriate approaches to enhance sustainable credentials

A critical  appraisal of ethical performance and critical debate of ethical dilemma, independence and governance related to profession and discipline via consideration to ethical codes or practice, regulation and standards.

Exceptional application; selected and defined tools, concepts and models for sustainable  and ethical management. Moderate.

Robust example(s) and application to the given context/company/case study.

Exception appreciation of social, economic and environmental sustainability and SDGs issues within the context of selection and justification of appropriate approaches to enhance sustainable credentials

A Comprehensive and Critical and in depth  appraisal of ethical performance and critical debate of ethical dilemma, independence and governance related to profession and discipline via consideration to ethical codes or practice, regulation and standards.

(3) Reasoning and Crafting of Arguments (25%)

 The ability to engage underpinned   with evidence based responses, whilst demonstrating understanding, knowledge and insight into SDGs, Ethical Code and Practices and Governance.

A critical analysis of the case study needs to be demonstrated with due regard to Ethics, Independence and Sustainability – shaping appropriate concepts

There is a total lack of written reasoning and arguments within the responses to questions.

A justifiable concern that the presentation is merely  reliant on the A1 Poster and presentation without any ability to participate in concepts

An attempt to craft arguments.

However, the responses lack a coherent argument in relation to ethical, sustainable and case study knowledge and understanding.

Provided adequate reasoning and well-crafted arguments.

A Clear and Concise ability to convey understanding and knowledge of ethical issues, sustainable aspects and professional codes of conduct and/or independence were evident.

A Good analysis of the case study through professional verbal exchanges in dealing with concepts

Provided Comprehensive verbal reasoning and well-crafted arguments.

A Critical ability to convey understanding and knowledge of ethical issues, sustainable aspects and professional codes of conduct and/or independence were evident.

A Robust analysis of the case study through professional verbal exchanges in dealing with concepts

Provided Comprehensive & Intellectually Provoking reasoning and well-crafted arguments.

A Critical ability to convey understanding and knowledge of ethical issues, sustainable aspects and professional codes of conduct and/or independence were evident. Moreover the alignment of the case study research to professional practice was evident

A Robust analysis of the case study through professional verbal exchanges in dealing with concepts 

Exceptional handling of reasoned and crafted arguments. The Poster and underpinned evidence  demonstrated significant academic and professional practice appreciation of ethical, independence, sustainable and governance aspects related to the case study.

All reasoning by analysis, critique of the case study and insight into professional practice were exemplary.

(4) Conclusion & Recommendations (25%):

Conclude the topics analysed for the company effectively, and be able to give clear recommendations within the case study analysed with consideration to ethics, sustainability, independence,  governance and professional practice  

No evidence of section/topics being identified.

Very little or no attempt made at presenting arguments or a discussion; instead relying on the statement of factual information. Lacks conclusion. Poor/no recommendations.

Lacks evidence of identified sections/topics throughout the document and little of no argument.

Poor conclusion. Few/no recommendations.

Sections/topics to be concluded are sufficiently clear and offer some argument. Some conclusion. Some recommendation.

Clearly argued, convincing and balanced conclusion and recommendations to each of the sections/topics discussed before.

Very clearly argued, highly convincing and well-balanced conclusion and recommendations to each of the sections/topics discussed before.

Exceptional level of argumentation and discussion.

Extremely well crafted and critical arguments that led to  highly convincing and well-balanced themes linked to analysis. The overall conclusion and recommendations worthy of an industry professional.

Overall Comments:

Strengths

Areas for improvement: