UK's No.1 Assignment Help, Trusted Since 2018
Get Expert-crafted assignments
Looking for Plagiarism-Free Answers for Your US, UK, Singapore, New Zealand, and Ireland College/University Assignments?
Talk to an Expert| Category | Assignment | Subject | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Northumbria University | Module Title | HR9534 Resourcing and Development for Diversity |
| Word Count | 3000 Words |
|---|---|
| Academic Year | 2026 |
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Programme: | Business and HRM (core) ; Business Management (option) |
| Module Code: | HR9534 |
| Module Title: | Resourcing and Development for Diversity |
| Distributed on: | First week of teaching |
| Submission Time and Date: | To be submitted by – tbc – please see BB site |
| Word Limit: | 3000 |
| Weighting | This coursework accounts for 100% of the total mark for this module |
| Submission of Assessment | Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA): Please note that if your assignment is submitted electronically, it will be submitted online via Turnitin by the given deadline. You will find a Turnitin link on the module’s eLP site. It is your responsibility to ensure that your assignment arrives before the submission deadline stated above. See the University policy on late submission of work. |
This assessment accounts for 100% of your HR9534 module mark and is in two parts.
Part 1 requires you to write a 2000-word report reviewing and evaluating the ChatGPT response to an essay question on Resourcing and Development for Diversity.
Part 2 requires you to reflect critically on two scenarios during the specified seminar sessions and on your overall learning related to the overarching topic of Resourcing and Development for Diversity.
Further information is provided below.
[MLO 1, 2 and 3] – Minimum 15 references. academic literature: 10 yrs; journal article: 5 years. NO I, WE. ALWAYS USE 3RD PERSON WRITING
a) Review the ChatGPT response (we will provide) to the following question:
“Please write a 2000-word university essay, with references, analysing and critically evaluating the importance of resourcing and development for diversity in organisations.”
Read and make notes about the strengths and weaknesses – your annotated answer will be included in your appendices. (Make notes by inserting the comment and highlighting)
b) Write a 2000-word essay that evaluates the ChatGPT answer against the assessment criteria, and uses additional academic literature to discuss up to two of the 10 module topics, e.g., Discrimination & Wellbeing at work. Include a summary also
Your answer must include relevant subject literature from academic journals and books, and a critical evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the ChatGPT answer.
[MLO 3, 4 and 5] – CAN USE 1? Minimum 7 references
This section of the assessment requires you to complete a 1000-word individual reflection examining key knowledge and skills you have developed in terms of managing a diverse workforce.
Specifically, we ask you to:
a) Write two 250-word reflections (500 words total) on the debates in week two (Meritocratic Recruitment versus Positive Action) and week seven (Targets Versus Behaviours Reward strategies). WATCH THE TWO VIDEOS. 2 referencing. Means part A, 4 referencing
b) Draw on your two reflections, write an additional 500-word reflective statement on what you have learned about the complexity and challenges of resourcing for a diverse workforce. You must critically reflect on what practices could be effective to address these challenges (using academic literature). (Combined reflection, evidence from academic literature to support). Mean 3 referencing.
c) Include a summary table of what knowledge (2) and skills (2) you have developed in relation to resourcing for diversity at the end of the reflection. (Just 4 bullet points will do)
This assessment will contribute directly to the following undergraduate goals and objectives:
Knowledge & Understanding:
Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:
Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity) (PVA):
Resourcing and Development for Diversity Assessment Marking Criteria
| Performance Area | 0-29% | 30-39% | 40-49% | 50-59% | 60-69% | 70-79% | 80-89% | 90-100% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000-word report (70%) | Does Not Meet Standards | Does Not Meet Standards | Meets Standards | Meets Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards |
| Analysis and critical evaluation of the importance of resourcing and development for diversity | The review of the literature is completely insufficient. Showing no understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals in the workplace and organisations. | Shows little/ limited understanding and review of relevant literature, current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals in the workplace and organisations. | Adequate review of literature that shows some descriptive understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals in the workplace and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. | Good critical review of relevant literature, but largely descriptive. Showing good understanding and, at times, good critical discussion of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. | A very good critical review of relevant literature throughout. Showing very good critical discussion and understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. | An excellent critical review of a range of relevant quality literature throughout. Showing an excellent critical discussion and understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals in the workplace and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. | An outstanding critical review of a wide range of relevant quality literature throughout. Showing strong critical discussion and understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. | An exemplary critical review of a wide range of relevant quality literature throughout. Showing exemplary critical discussion and an exemplary understanding of current research, debates, theories/ models regarding the issues and challenges for individuals and organisations in encouraging and advancing D&I efforts. |
| Evaluation of resourcing strategies and practices to promote diversity | Completely insufficient evaluation. Little or no identification OR discussion of resourcing strategies/ practices. | Insufficient evaluation. Limited identification OR discussion of resourcing strategies/ practices. | Adequate evaluation. Some identification of how resourcing strategies/ practices can promote diversity. Text is descriptive and lacks critical evaluation. | Good evaluation. Resourcing strategies/ practices are identified and supported by relevant evidence/ literature. Text is largely descriptive but at times shows some good critical evaluation. | Very good evaluation. Resourcing strategies/ practices are identified and supported by a range of relevant evidence/ literature. Text demonstrates critical evaluation throughout. | Excellent evaluation. Resourcing strategies/ practices are identified and supported by a range of quality evidence/ literature. Text demonstrates excellent critical evaluation throughout and across all resourcing practices, which can promote diversity. | Outstanding evaluation. Resourcing strategies/ practices are identified and supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature. Evaluation conveys a clear critical argument at a high level throughout and across all resourcing practices, which can promote diversity. | Exemplary evaluation. Resourcing strategies/ practices are identified and supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature. Evaluation conveys a clear critical argument that integrates all resourcing strategies/ practices at a high level of debate. |
| Evaluation of the effectiveness of HR development strategies and practices to promote diversity and inclusion | Completely insufficient evaluation. Little or no consideration of the historic development of norms, OR evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations. | Insufficient evaluation. Limited consideration of the historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged. Little evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations. | Adequate evaluation. Some consideration of the historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged. Text is descriptive and lacks a critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations. | Good evaluation. Some good consideration of the historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged, supported by relevant evidence/ literature. Text is largely descriptive but at times shows some good critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations. | Very good evaluation. Identification of historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged, supported by a range of relevant evidence/ literature. Text demonstrates critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations, with some critical discussion of the diversity cases. | Excellent evaluation. Excellent evaluation of the historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged, supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature. Text demonstrates excellent critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations, as well as excellent critical discussion of the diversity cases. | Outstanding evaluation. A clear critical evaluation of the historic development of norms, how these impact practices and how they can be challenged is conveyed at a high level and supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature. Outstanding critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations, as well as excellent critical discussion of the diversity cases. | Exemplary evaluation. A clear critical evaluation of the historic development of norms, how these impact on practices and how they can be challenged is conveyed at a high level and supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature. Exemplary critical evaluation of the role of leaders and managers in fostering inclusive organisations, as well as outstanding critical discussion of the diversity cases. |
| The legal framework context | Completely insufficient. Little or no integration of the role of the legal framework. No consideration of the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, nor local, national and global concerns. | Insufficient. Limited integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity. Little consideration of the wider context, OR local, national and global concerns. | Adequate integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by some evidence/ literature. Some consideration of the wider context, alongside local, national and global concerns. | Good integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by relevant evidence/ literature considering the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, alongside local, national and global concerns. | Very good integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by a range of relevant evidence/ literature considering the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, alongside local, national and global concerns. | Excellent integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by a range of quality evidence/ literature throughout, considering the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, alongside local, national and global concerns. | Outstanding integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature throughout, considering the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, alongside local, national and global concerns. | Exemplary integration of the role of the legal framework regarding managing diversity, supported by a wide range of quality evidence/ literature throughout, considering the wider context of social, economic and demographic changes, alongside local, national and global concerns. |
| Conclusion | Little or no evidence of conclusive remarks. | Limited evidence of conclusive remarks. | Adequate conclusive remarks. | Good conclusive remarks reflective of the discussion in the text. | Very good conclusive remarks, very well integrated with the discussion of the report. | Excellent, clear conclusive remarks, very well integrated with the discussion of the report. | Outstanding, clear conclusive remarks that integrate the discussion of the report to a high standard. | Exemplary, clear conclusive remarks that integrate the discussion of the report to a very high standard. |
| Structure, flow of argument and reference/ evidence quality | The presentation is completely insufficient. No clear outline and focus. The text contains numerous spelling and grammatical errors. All of the text OR large sections are unsupported by references OR completely insufficient quality of references that are cited incorrectly. | Presentation is insufficient. Insufficient clarity of focus. The text contains many spelling and grammatical errors. Limited referencing throughout and/ or references cited incorrectly. Insufficient quality of references/ evidence. | Presentation is adequate. Text identifies focus somewhat. Few spelling and grammatical errors throughout. References are mostly cited appropriately in compliance with APA style. Adequate quality of references/ evidence. | Good presentation throughout. Text clearly identifies focus. Spelling and grammar are showing a good standard. Good APA referencing throughout the text. Good quality of references/ evidence. The flow of the argument could improve between sections. | Very good presentation throughout. Text demonstrates a very clear focus with a very good flow of argument between sections, and a high standard of spelling and grammar. Very good APA referencing throughout the text. Very good quality of references/ evidence throughout the text. | Excellent presentation throughout. Text conveys clarity and purpose. Demonstrates a high standard of spelling and grammar. An excellent standard of APA referencing throughout the text. Excellent quality of references/ evidence throughout the text, showing excellent flow of argument throughout. | Outstanding presentation throughout. Text conveys outstanding focus, clarity, and purpose. Demonstrates a high standard of spelling and grammar and a strong, convincing flow of argument. An excellent standard of APA referencing throughout the text. Excellent range and quality of references/ evidence throughout the text. | Exemplary presentation throughout. Text conveys a convincing focus, clarity, and purpose. Demonstrates an exceptionally high standard of spelling and grammar and a creative and convincing flow of argument. An excellent standard of APA referencing throughout the text. Excellent wide range and quality of references/ evidence throughout the text. |
| Performance Area | Does Not Meet Standards | Does Not Meet Standards | Meets Standards | Meets Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards | Exceeds Standards |
| 1000-word Individual reflective report 30% | Completely insufficient. Little or no reflection of learning based on module debates. No evidence of reflection about the complexity and challenges of resourcing for a diverse workforce. Summary table of knowledge and skills missing. | Insufficient. Limited reflection of learning based on module debates. Limited evidence of reflection about the complexity and challenges of resourcing for a diverse workforce. Summary table of knowledge and skills included but limited. | Adequate reflection of learning based on module debates. In the majority, descriptive and lack reflection about the complexity and challenges of resourcing for a diverse workforce. Consideration of skills and knowledge developed, but this is mainly descriptive. | Good reflection of learning based on module debates. Some good reflection on the complexity and challenges of resourcing for a diverse workforce. Though still rather descriptive. Some good reflection on both the key knowledge acquired across the module and the skills needed to manage a diverse workforce; however, this is mainly descriptive. | Very good reflection of learning. Discusses own position on module topics across several sessions. Good evidence of seminar attendance and engagement. Very good reflection on both the key knowledge acquired across the module and the skills needed to manage a diverse workforce. | Excellent reflection of learning. Discusses own position on module topics across several sessions and integrates debates beyond module content. Good range of evidence of seminar attendance and engagement. Very good reflection on both the key knowledge acquired across the module and the skills needed to manage a diverse workforce. | Outstanding reflection of learning. Discusses own position on module topics across several sessions and integrates debates beyond module content to reflect on own position. Very good range of evidence of seminar attendance and engagement. Excellent reflection on both the key knowledge acquired across the module and the skills needed to manage a diverse workforce. | Exemplary reflection of learning. Discusses own position on module topics across several sessions and integrates debates beyond module content to critically reflect on own position. Excellent reflection on both the key knowledge acquired across the module and the skills needed to manage a diverse workforce and links made between the different topics. |
You are advised to read the guidance for students regarding assessment policies. They are available online here.
The Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards (ARTA) set out the Regulations and procedures governing cheating, plagiarism, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of academic misconduct.
The full policy is available here
You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of academic misconduct, as referred to in the Academic Misconduct procedure of the assessment regulations, are taken very seriously. Assignments in which evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct is found may receive a mark of zero.
Where coursework is submitted without approval, after the published hand-in deadline, the following penalties will apply. For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment (i.e.100%) shall be deducted from the assessment mark.
For clarity: a late piece of work that would have scored 65%, 55% or 45% had it been handed in on time will be awarded 55%, 45% or 35% respectively, as 10% of the total available marks will have been deducted.
The Penalty does not apply to Pass/Fail Modules, i.e. there will be no penalty for late submission if assessments on Pass/Fail are submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline.
Coursework submitted more than 1 day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval will be marked as zero but will be eligible for referral. The reassessment should, where appropriate, and as determined by the Module Leader, be the same method (e.g. essay) but maybe with a different task (e.g. different essay title) or with the same task (e.g. the same essay title) as indicated in the Module handbook.
In modules where there is more than one assessment component, Students are not required to complete all assessment components if an overall Pass Mark (40% UG, 50% PGT) has been achieved.
The only permitted exception will be in cases where the University is prevented from doing so by a PSRB requirement. In the case of PSRB requirements, a variation order will be required from the regulations.
In modules, where there is more than one assessment component and an overall pass mark has not been achieved, Students will be eligible for a referral* in the individual failed module and/or not attempted component(s) of assessment.
These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis.
The full policy can be found here
The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment and the assignment cover sheet. The word count does not include:
The word count (3000 words) does NOT include front cover, contents, tables and reference lists.
Please note in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011, p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARTA, this will be regarded as academic misconduct.
For those assessments where students are required to keep to the word limit, it is proposed that they should be informed that the marker will stop reading at the point when they judge that the word limit exceeds the recommended word count by more than 10%. The marker will indicate the point at which they stop reading the text.
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices), and it must be made available within 24hours of them requesting it to be submitted.
The full Word Limit Policy is available here.
Achieve Higher Grades of CMI HR9534 Resourcing and Development for Diversity Assignment & Raise Your Grades
Order Non Plagiarized AssignmentDo you need support with your HR9534 Resourcing and Development for Diversity Assignment? Our easy and friendly Human Resource Management Assignment Help is here to guide you through every topic. You can use our clear assignment examples and Samples to understand how to structure your work and improve your learning. With reliable Assignment Help UK, you get simple explanations, helpful tips, and study guidance to boost your confidence. Make your assignment journey stress-free—learn better, understand more, and move forward with success!
Hire Assignment Helper Today!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
