| Category | Assignment | Subject | Finance |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Cardiff Metropolition University (CMU) | Module Title | MSM7045 The Global Economy: International Trade and Finance |
| Academic Year | 2025/26 |
|---|

| Assessment title | Abr. | Weighting |
| The Global Economy Today | WRIT1 | 100% |
| Pass marks are 40% for undergraduate work and 50% for postgraduate work unless stated otherwise. | ||
Consider the following task.
For this work you are required to conduct a scoping review which aims to identify, map, and synthesize the existing literature on the multifaceted challenges currently facing the global economy—including economic, social, political, environmental, and technological dimensions.
The aim of this assessment is to investigate, analyse, and critically evaluate such a review, and evaluate the extent of the threat posed to the global economy.
You are to do this in two parts.
In this part you are to create what we call a PRISMA-ScR template, into which you will review and consider this area of study. Part One will constitute 25% of the total mark and be approximately 1000 words or equivalent in length.
Do You Need MSM7045 Assignment of This Question
Order Non Plagiarized AssignmentFurther Detail
Below is set out in more detail what each part and section of this work requires. Please note that workshops will be given to support the development of tools, skills and techniques for all elements of this assessment. For these sessions, please see the module handbook for more details.
Part One. (25%)
In Workshops 1 and 2 you will be introduced to the scoping review process and the PRISMA-ScR template you are required to submit for part one of this assessment. In this planning stage you will work in groups and cover much of what you will be required to consider.
The PRISMA-ScR template can be found in the assessment folder within the modules Moodle pages.
Part Two (75%)
Section 1 (35%). Conduct a thematic analysis of your ten articles drawing out themes and connections that help you address and better understand the problems faced by the global economic system. You are expected to not only use your ten articles in this analysis, but draw on wider reading to support, substantiate and develop your arguments. As stated, this section should be approximately 1500 words.
Section 2 (25%). As part of this assessment, you are required to make explicit and reflect upon the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, etc.) as part of your research and writing process.
The 750-word commentary required for this section should include:
-Which AI tools were used and why?
-Examples of prompts and brief excerpts of responses.
-Reflections on how AI outputs were adapted or challenged.
-Offer insight into the value and limitations of AI in your learning and writing process.
Section 3 (15%). As stated, this section requires you to evaluate the scoping review and thematic analysis methodology. What is critical here is that you reflect on your use and demonstrate through your experience the strengths and weaknesses of this methodology, it is not sufficient to simply identify strengths and weaknesses in a purely theoretical context.
|
Part |
Section |
Element Description |
Weighting |
Word Count |
Workshop Support |
|
One |
Step 1 & 2 |
Preparation & Article Collection |
|
- |
Workshops 1and 2 – Article data bases, and using PRISMA-ScR |
|
|
Step 3 & 4 |
Create Systematic Review Template, and review 5 articles |
|
– |
|
|
|
Step 5 Submission |
Combination of steps 1 and 2 above (500-word summary) + Step 4 completed template |
25% |
Approx. 1000 words equivalent |
|
|
Two |
Section 1 |
Thematic analysis of 10 articles, with wider implications for the global economic system |
35% |
Approx. 1500 words |
Workshop 6 – Doing Thematic Analysis |
|
|
Section 2 |
Reflective commentary on use of AI and digital scholarship |
25% |
Approx. 750 words |
Workshop 7 – Effective use of AI |
|
|
Section 3 |
Evaluation of the systematic review/thematic analysis methodology based on personal experience |
15% |
Approx. 750 words |
|
Word count (or equivalent): 4000
This a reflection of the effort required for the assessment. Word counts will normally include any text, tables, calculations, figures, subtitles and citations. Reference lists and contents of appendices are excluded from the word count. Contents of appendices are not usually considered when determining your final assessment grade.
Scoping Review
A scoping review is a type of literature review that aims to map the existing research on a broad topic or area of interest. It is especially useful when a topic is complex or has not been reviewed comprehensively before.
Full instruction on how to conduct such a review will be given.
|
Submission Deadline: |
Submission is split into two parts. Part 1 06/11/25, and Part 2 18/12/25 |
Estimated Feedback Return Date |
This will normally be 20 working days after final submission. Formative feedback will be given on Part 1 |
|
Submission Time: |
By 4.00pm on the deadline day. |
|
|
|
Moodle/Turnitin: |
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as a non-attempt unless you have had an extension request agreed or have approved mitigating circumstances. See the School Moodle pages for more information on extensions and mitigating circumstances. |
||
|
File Format: |
The assessment must be submitted as a pdf document (save the document as a pdf in your software) and submit through the Turnitin submission point in Moodle. Your assessment should be titled with your: student ID number, module code and assessment ID, e.g. st12345678 BHL5007 WRIT1 |
||
|
Late Submission Window Eligibility |
Where submissions are eligible for the late-submission window this will be communicated in the relevant assessment submission point within Moodle. |
||
|
Feedback |
Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle. Feedback will be provided with comments on your strengths and the areas which you can improve. View the guidance on how to access your feedback. All marks are provisional and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at the programme Examination Board. |
||
The following learning outcomes are assessed (see Module document)
Other skills/attributes developed
This includes elements of the Cardiff Met EDGE (Ethical, Digital, Global and Entrepreneurial skills) and other attributes developed in students through the completion of the module and assessment. These will also be highlighted in the module guidance, which should be read by all students completing the module. Assessments are not just a way of auditing student knowledge. They are a process which provides additional learning and development through the preparation for and completion of the assessment.
The following skills are developed in this assessment
Digital. How was AI used?
-Which AI tools were used and why?
-Examples of prompts and brief excerpts of responses.
-Reflections on how AI outputs were adapted or challenged.
-Offer insight into the value and limitations of AI in your learning and writing process.
Entrepreneurial - Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis. How to analyses and evaluate information is an important skill graduates need to perform effectively in the workplace. This module provides the opportunity to develop such a knowledge of data collection methodology, and requires students to reflect upon its use and application.
|
Level 7 |
80%-100% (Distinction+) |
70%-79% (Distinction) |
60%-69% (Merit) |
50%-59% (Pass) |
Below 49% (Fail) |
|
Overall summary |
Excellent (80-89%) or outstanding and exceptional (90-100%) Beyond level 7 Worthy of publication |
Very good
|
Good
|
Threshold
|
Not met some learning outcomes/assessment criteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowledge & Understanding (20%) |
Exceptional mastery of subject/research
|
Subject knowledge and understanding full and detailed. Mastery demonstrated Can extend, transform and apply knowledge Awareness of limitations of knowledge Sophisticated discussion Independent thinking and action. Original insights |
Full subject knowledge and understanding. Mastery demonstrated Can extend, transform and apply knowledge Discussion of complex concepts is often tackled successfully Some independent thinking and action |
Basic but secure subject knowledge and understanding. Mastery demonstrated Frequently descriptive and based on given sources Limited independent thinking and action |
Limited subject knowledge and understanding Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions in important areas Irrelevant content
|
|
Presentation and communication (10%) |
Eloquent and professional style |
Coherent and succinct Presentation standard high Logically organised Arguments are well-defined and clearly articulated |
Clear and succinct Well presented Appropriately organised Well-articulated |
Satisfactory communication Lacks academic rigour Describing and reporting factual information Appropriately structured |
Confused and clumsily expressed. Unclear
|
|
Analysis & discussion (30%) |
Extensive and independent enquiry to solve problems |
Detailed analysis and critical enquiry Expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Highly successful in presenting, synthesising and commenting on research process and outcomes Insight on the relationship between theory and practice |
Some detailed analysis and critical enquiry Expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Considerable success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes Some linkage between theory and practice |
Some limited analysis and critical enquiry Limited expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Some success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes
|
Some enquiry/analysis but research process and outcomes may be naïve, simplistic and/or unconvincing |
|
Research / scholarship (10%) |
Insight and critical awareness of research/scholarship Substantial range of reference citations, beyond expectations |
Detailed, thorough knowledge and systematic understanding of current research/advanced scholarship The use of scholarly reviews/primary sources is sophisticated Referencing accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Thorough knowledge and understanding of current research/scholarship Ability to design research/apply methods/knowledge/skills The referencing almost always accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Some knowledge of research/scholarship/application of methods/skills and their implications Some errors in referencing Over-reliance on given sources |
Limited or sporadic knowledge of research/scholarship Application largely unsuccessful Frequent errors in the referencing Over-reliance on programme materials
|
|
Structured argument and critical evaluation(20%) |
May challenge the boundaries of knowledge Innovative and/or creative thinking New insights informed through critical evaluation |
Critical evaluation and informed judgements Clear recognition of the complexities of academic debate. Arguments are well developed, sustained and substantiated Appropriate and sometimes innovative solutions are offered to problems There is strong evidence of effective reflection on student’s practice and consideration for future development |
Critical evaluation and reflection Arguments are clearly considered and substantiated Appropriate judgements and solutions offered to problems Ability to reflect on student’s practice and plan future development |
Limited ability to critically evaluate and reflect Arguments substantiated but under-developed Descriptive and factual presentation favoured Limited and superficial reflection with little consideration for future development |
Little evidence of critical evaluation and reflection Arguments rarely substantiated Largely descriptive Self-evaluation and reflections are extremely limited |
|
AI Use & Digital Scholarship (10%) |
Sophisticated and reflective integration of AI tools. Outstanding critical evaluation of AI-generated content. Demonstrates excellent insight into limitations, bias, relevance, and use of AI as an augmentative tool. Commentary is rich, transparent, and well-connected to the academic content. |
Very good use of AI tools, well-documented and purposefully applied. Strong reflection and appropriate differentiation between AI-generated and student-authored content. Demonstrates critical thinking about AI’s academic value and limitations. |
Clear use of AI tools with some reflective insight. Commentary acknowledges relevance, utility, and limitations, but analysis is somewhat surface-level. AI use complements student input but may lack depth in critical judgement. |
AI tools may be used but without meaningful evaluation. Commentary is descriptive rather than analytical. Limited awareness of the boundaries and implications of AI use. |
Unacknowledged, inappropriate, or over-reliant AI use. Lack of critical engagement. Commentary missing, inadequate, or fails to meet expectations. Risk of academic misconduct or poor scholarly judgement. |
Hire Experts to solve MSM7045 Assignment Before Deadline
Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized AssignmentHaving trouble with your MSM7045 The Global Economy: International Trade and Finance Assignment? Our dedicated services provide online assignment help in the UK specifically designed for students seeking assistance with assignments. Our UK Assignment experts are committed to guiding you through your coursework, ensuring personalized support for your academic success. We also provide free Cardiff Metropolitan University Assignment Samples.Trust our team to deliver original work and leverage our extensive experience. Contact us today to simplify your academic journey and reach your educational objectives with confidence.
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content