LDI7008M Applied Research Project Assignment Brief 2026 | YSJU

Module Details 

Module code:

LDI7008M

Level of Study:

7

Assessment format:

Written Work MS-Word

Method of submission:

Turnitin within Moodle

Deadline or Assessment Period:

Wednesday 2-September-2026, 12:00 noon GMT

Feedback date and place:

25 working days

Audio/written feedback within Turnitin/Moodle

Assessment limits: length, load, word count, etc.

500 words (refer to https://www.yorksj.ac.uk/students/exams-and-assessment/over-length-work/)

Component number:

1

Is this exempt from anonymous marking under the policy?

Yes

Component weighting:

20%

General Characteristics

Pass

(50 – 59) 

Merit

(60 – 69) 

Distinction

(70 – 84) 

Distinction

(85 – 100) 

Borderline Fail

(45 - 49)

(Credits may be compensated)

Fail

(30 - 44)

(Credits may not be compensated)

Fail

(0 - 29)

(Credits may not be compensated)

Adjectives

Satisfactory

Good

Excellent

Exemplary

Not Successful

Unsuccessful

Fail

Subject

knowledge &

understanding (30%)

Broad subject matter knowledge and conceptual understanding, demonstrating   directed reading/research.

Logical approach to individual research topic, demonstrating some awareness of complexity about contemporary/emerging/ controversial primary and secondary research within the discipline.

Detailed subject matter knowledge and conceptual understanding demonstrating purposeful reading/research.

Sound approach to individual research topic, developing awareness of complexity about contemporary/emerging/ controversial primary and secondary research within the discipline.

Comprehensive subject matter knowledge and conceptual understanding, informed by recent developments in the discipline, demonstrating reading/research at significant depth/breadth.

Informed and confident approach to individual research topic, as well as complexity about contemporary/emerging/ controversial primary and secondary research within the discipline.

Demonstrates exceptional subject matter expertise and a deep conceptual understanding that is at the forefront of the discipline. The approach to individual research topics is authoritative and thoroughly evidence-based, reflecting a sophisticated grasp of both contemporary and emerging issues, as well as complex or controversial primary and secondary research within the discipline.

Reproduction of taught content and/or tendency to describe subject matter or report facts rather than demonstrate complex ideas.

Basic approach to individual research topic, with areas of weakness.

Any errors or misconceptions are outweighed by the overall degree of knowledge & understanding demonstrated.

Insufficient evidence of knowledge and understanding of subject matter and its underlying concepts.

Weak approach to individual research topic.

Little or no evidence of knowledge and understanding of subject matter and its underlying concepts.

Flawed or no evidence of approach to individual research topic.  

Critical thinking skills 

(15%)

The work has attempted to apply advanced critical thinking skills methodically to material from the taught content (core and additional) and to present an evidence-led understanding of the topic.

The work has systematically applied advanced critical thinking skills to the (taught and independently researched) material. It has identified problems with, or asked questions about, the source material and proposed appropriate approaches to resolve these.

The work has successfully offered and evidenced new insights into problems or areas of development which are central to research in this discipline.

The work has created new insights or proposed new hypotheses (where appropriate) in response to problems or areas of development which are at the forefront of research in this discipline. It shows a professional awareness and application of the thinking skills used to process this knowledge.

The work may have applied some thinking skills to part of the existing knowledge from the taught content but not enough of these are advanced thinking skills. More of the core content needs to be addressed or applied in this work.

The work has applied a few thinking skills to the materials from the core content but none of these are advanced thinking skills. Most of the core content has not been addressed or applied. The work is limited by some misunderstandings, misapplications, or gaps in key areas of knowledge from the taught content.

The work has not applied the required thinking skills to the course content. Little or no core content has been addressed or applied. The work is limited by significant misunderstandings, misapplications, or gaps in key areas of knowledge from the taught content.

Research skills  (30%)

The work has attempted to apply appropriate research methods from the taught content correctly. It has attempted to solve problems and answer research questions which have been encountered in directed and independent studies.

The work has successfully utilised research methods from the taught content and independent studies. It has carefully selected and applied these research methods to generate data and / or insights to solve complex problems or answer bespoke research questions.

The work is supported by an appropriate / systematic / thoughtful methodological approach and design. The work demonstrates a strong competency and in-depth understanding of the purpose and function of its research methods.

The work has successfully developed new knowledge by using research tools, research design and methodology effectively. It clearly articulates the researcher’s position. The design and rigour of the planning and implementation of the research adheres to the professional standards of the field / discipline / industry.

The work may have partially applied some of the research methods from the taught content to existing knowledge. It does not yet use these skills and methods to solve problems and / or answer research questions. The work needs to include a more coherent account of how these skills and methods are relevant or applicable to the research topic.

The work does not apply the required research methods to existing knowledge. These skills and methods are not used to solve problems and / or answer research questions. The work does not articulate how these skills and methods are relevant or applicable to the research topic. There may be some misunderstandings and misapplications.

The work does not address the required research methods nor apply them to existing knowledge. The work does not attempt to solve problems and / or answer research questions. There is misunderstanding and misapplication of these skills and methods to the taught content and to the research topic.

Communication (15%)

The work is largely clear, coherent and communicates appropriately to an audience. It is aware of relevant research areas/ disciplines and uses an appropriate writing or presentation style.

The work communicates using technically proficient language appropriate to the medium and its intended audience. It shows an appreciation of relevant technologies.

The work communicates persuasively. It engages with relevant research areas/ disciplines and communicates complex ideas in ways that are accessible to specialist and non-specialist audiences.

The work communicates with a structure which flows logically. It successfully communicates complex ideas in ways that would be understandable to a range of specialist and non-specialist audiences. The work engages ethically with relevant research areas/ disciplines and uses them in a socially responsible way.

The mode of communication in this work is comprehensible to some extent and there may be some areas of focus (topic / conclusions / intended audience). The work’s language may show some technical proficiency and partially apply an appropriate writing or presentation style but there are gaps, mistakes, or inconsistencies.

The work’s clarity and focus are limited. The language used is not consistent in its coherence or technical proficiency and the works applies few of the features of an appropriate writing or presentation style.

The work has little or no clarity or focus and does not attempt to communicate to an audience. The language used is not clear or technically proficient. Little or no attempt has been made to apply an appropriate writing or presentation style.

Creativity (10%)

The work attempts to adapt / combine / transform existing knowledge /concepts to a sufficient extent that it is distinct from these inspirations.

The work is new and valuable by being functional, thought-provoking, and /or informative to an intended audience.

The work and its creative idea / approach is new, surprising, and valuable to a clearly identified audience. It operates at a level of creativity comparable to industry / professional expectations.

The creative idea and style inform (and are integrated consistently into) the work. It is new, valuable, and surprising to an identifiable and well-defined audience and it exceeds this audience’s expectations. It operates as a leading example in the field / discipline / industry.

The work may demonstrate some originality (being new, valuable, or surprising) by adapting / combining / transforming some existing knowledge/ concepts. It partially explains its value or engages an audience, but it needs to distinguish itself from existing knowledge / concepts more clearly.

The work has evidences limited originality (newness, value, surprisingness). It shows few adaptations / combinations / transformations of existing knowledge / concepts to explain its purpose or function or to engage an identified audience. It has mostly replicated existing knowledge / concepts.

This work evidences little or no originality (newness, value, surprisingness). It relies too greatly on replicating a very narrow range of existing knowledge / specific concepts. It does not explain its value nor identify an audience.