OFFERS!
Get Expert-crafted assignments
Get Expert-crafted assignments
Save 51%
Get Expert-crafted assignments
| Category | Assignment | Subject | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | UWE Bristol | Module Title | UMODXH-60-M Management Project and Research Methods |
| Assessment title: | Critical Discussion | Size or length of assessment: | 20-minute discussion of portfolio |
| Assessment type: | Project | ACADEMIC YEAR | 2024/25 |
Use of AI in assessment: As this is a discussion, it is not relevant to use AI for this assessment. Use of devices or scripts are not permitted in the discussion.
Submission deadline: Between 26th May and 6th June 2025. You will be allocated a specific time slot between these dates.
As this is an inperson discussion, the assessment is not eligible for 48 hour late submission window
Submission format: verbal discussion
Marks and Feedback due on: 20 working days after the date of the Critical Discussion.
N.B. all times are 24-hour clock, current local time (at time of submission) in the UK
Marks and Feedback will be provided via: Blackboard
What am I required to do on this assessment?
Throughout teaching blocks 2 and 3, you will submit four pieces of work relating to your research project, which will build into a portfolio. This assessment requires you to discuss your project with two examiners. The examiners will have access to your portfolio during the critical discussion, which will take place on campus.
The two-weekly research project workshops and associated workbook are designed to support you in designing and conducting your research project and submitting your portfolio tasks, as well preparing for the critical discussion. Make sure you attend these workshops complete the tasks in the module workbook before each session.
You will submit four portfolio tasks:
1. Outline of theoretical underpinnings by
2. Project definition and approach by
3. Methodology poster and ethics form by
4. Data evidence and analysis plan by
There is some flexibility about the format of the portfolio submissions. Please refer to module workbook and the workshop materials for more guidance on how to complete each task. You will be given feedback on each task by your mentor within 3 weeks of the submission date. Make sure you arrange a feedback meeting with your mentor following the submission of each task and that you make changes to your portfolio in line with the advice that you are given.
What do I need to do to pass?
You must achieve a minimum of 50% in this task to pass.
How does the learning and teaching relate to the assessment?
All workshop sessions and workbook tasks are related to the assessment as follows:
1. Outline of theoretical underpinnings: workshops 1 - 3
2. Project definition and approach: workshops 4 - 5
3. Methodology poster and ethics form: workshops 5 - 8
4. Data evidence and analysis plan: Workshops: 8 – 10
5. The critical discussion: workshop 11
What additional resources may help me complete this assessment?
• Attending all five meetings your mentor.
• Assessments tab on Blackboard.
• Formative feedback on draft presentation plan in tutorials.
• Module Leader’s office hours as per Blackboard.
• The UWE Library Study Skills pages for online support and bookable workshops.
• Learning Hub’s bookable workshops.
• Guidance on using UWE’s Library FAQs and other resources on your Blackboard site.
Your assessment will be marked according to the following marking criteria.
You can use these to evaluate your own work before you submit.
Ethics approval: this must be granted by your supervisor before data is collected. Failure to submit the online ethics form with your supervisor will be considered an automatic assessment offence. This work will not be marked if an online ethics form is not submitted, or if any data collection activity was not signed off at the ethics approval stage, or if any data collection activity breaches university ethics guidelines.
| Criteria | Met | Not met |
| Ethics | Clear plans for data privacy/protection, informed consent, opportunity to withdraw, anonymity and confidentiality are outlined. Ethics approval was granted before data collection. | Ethics approval not granted before data collection. Any breach of this ethics approval. Lack of clarity about plans for data privacy/protection, informed consent, opportunity to withdraw, anonymity and/or confidentiality |
|
Criteria |
PASS Exceptional (80-100) |
PASS Excellent (70-79) |
PASS Good /Very good (60-69)
|
PASS Satisfactory (needs some improvement) (50-59) |
MARGINAL FAIL Failed to meet some criteria (45-49) |
FAIL Failed to meet a number of criteria (0-44) |
|
Research area |
Your topic is current, relevant to the discipline and aligned with your professional aspirations and/or academic interests. Your topic would be a valuable contribution to academic/ professional decision-making. You justify each of these clearly. 8-10 marks |
Your topic is current, relevant to the discipline and aligned with your professional aspirations. Your topic would be a valuable contribution to academic/ professional decision-making. One or more of these areas is less well justified. 7 marks |
Your topic is current, relevant to the discipline and aligned with your professional aspirations. Your topic would be a useful contribution to academic/ professional decision-making. One or more of these areas is not justified. 6 marks |
Your topic is relevant to the discipline, but may not be up to date or clearly aligned with your professional aspirations. Your topic would make a small contribution to academic/ professional decision-making. One or more of these areas is not justified. 5 marks |
Your topic is relevant to the discipline, but is not up to date or clearly aligned with your personal aspirations your topic would contribute little to academic/ professional decision-making. No justification is provided for two or more of these areas. 4 marks |
Your topic is not relevant to the discipline, not current and / or not clearly aligned with your personal aspirations. Your topic would not contribute to academic/ professional decision-making. No justification for choice of topic. 0-3 marks |
|
Foundations for the research in academic and professional literature |
Your literature sources reflect both recent and important older papers. You identify key themes. You explore specific areas of the literature relevant to the topic in depth. You give a strong critique of both the theory and methods of the sources. |
Your literature sources reflect both recent and important older papers. You identify key themes. You explore specific areas of the literature relevant to the topic in depth. You give a good critique of both the theory and methods of the sources. 14-15 marks |
Your literature sources reflect many recent and important older papers. You identify key themes. You explore some areas of the literature relevant to the topic in depth. You give a competent critique of both the theory and methods of the sources. 12-13 marks
|
Your literature sources reflect key issues but neglects more recent developments or important older papers. You identify themes but cover too much too shallowly for the study to focus upon. You apply some critique of the theory and methods of the sources. 10-11 marks |
Your literature sources miss some key issues and neglects more recent developments and/or important older papers. Themes are lacking or too broad. Your do not critique the theory and/or methods of the sources. 8-9 marks |
Your literature sources miss many key issues and/or neglects more recent developments and important older papers. Themes are lacking or very broad. Your do not critique the theory and/or methods of the sources. 0-7 marks
|
|
Your project definition and approach
(20% of total mark)
|
Your project definition and approach are strongly justified by the literature, original, achievable for a master's project, specific and align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 8-10 marks |
Your project definition and approach are well justified by the literature, achievable for a master's project, specific and align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 7 marks |
Your project definition and approach are justified by the literature, achievable for a master's project, specific and align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 6 marks |
Your project definition and approach are weakly justified by the literature, achievable for a master's project, are broad, and loosely align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 5 marks |
Your project definition and approach are not justified by the literature, may not be achievable for a master's project, are broad and loosely align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 4 marks |
Your project definition and approach are not justified by the literature, are too broad, and/or do not align with the chosen research approach/methodology. 0-3 marks |
|
Research and data collection methods |
Your data collection methods/instruments are consistent with the chosen approach and strongly informed by the literature/theory. These are well justified and designed to generate robust, valid data that addresses the research question. You discuss strengths and weaknesses of the research in good depth. 16-20 marks |
Your data collection methods/instruments are consistent with the chosen approach and informed by the literature/theory. These are well justified and designed to generate robust, valid data that addresses the research question. You discuss strengths and weaknesses of the research in some depth. 14-15 marks |
Your data collection methods/instruments are consistent with the chosen approach and may be informed by the literature/theory. These are justified and designed to generate robust, valid data that addresses the research question. You discuss few strengths and weaknesses of the research. 12-13 marks |
Your data collection methods/instruments are consistent with the chosen approach and designed to generate data that addresses the research question with reasonable justification but some inconsistencies. Little or no discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the research. 10-11 marks |
Your data collection methods are inconsistent with the chosen approach and/or not designed to generate data that addresses the research question with poor justification. Little or no discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the research. 8-9 marks
|
Your data collection methods are inconsistent with the chosen approach and not designed to generate data that addresses the research question with no justification. No discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the research. 0-7 marks
|
|
Plans for Data analysis |
Your plans for analysis and interpretation of your data are consistent with the research approach and thoughtfully answer the research questions. You discuss the strengths and weaknesses (limitations) of the proposed process in depth. 16-20 marks |
Your plans for analysis and interpretation of your data are consistent with the research approach and answer the research questions. You discuss the strengths and weaknesses (limitations) of the proposed process in some depth. 14-15 marks |
Your plans for analysis and interpretation of your data are mostly consistent with the research approach and answer the research questions. You discuss the strengths and weaknesses (limitations) of the proposed process. 12-13 marks
|
Your plans for analysis and interpretation of your data have some consistencies with the research approach and would answer the research questions to some extent. Little discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed process. 10-11 marks |
Your plans indicate little understanding of the analysis methods and how the data can be interpreted into actionable conclusions. No discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed process. 8-9 marks
|
Your plans indicate no understanding of the analysis methods and how the data can be interpreted into actionable conclusions. No discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed process. 0-7 marks
|
|
Project management and engagement with the research process (10% of total mark) |
You demonstrate independent learning, submitting considered portfolio entries on time, critically reflecting on all feedback from your mentor and using this to improve your work. 16-20 marks |
You demonstrate independent learning, submitting portfolio entries on time, critically reflecting on most of the feedback from your mentor and using this to improve your work.
14-15 marks |
You demonstrate independent learning, submitting portfolio entries on time and reflecting on some of the feedback from your mentor to improve your work.
12-13 mark |
You demonstrate independent learning, submitting portfolio entries on time but with little use of feedback from your mentor to improve your work.
10-11 marks |
You missed some portfolio deadlines and did not use of feedback from the mentor to improve your work. 8-9 marks
|
You missed most portfolio deadlines and did not use of feedback from the mentor to improve your work. 0-7 marks
|
Are you looking for assignment help online by UK writers? We specialize in assisting with assignments like the UMODXH-60-M Management Project and Research Methods. With our 100% plagiarism-free content, you can trust us to deliver high-quality work every time. You can also pay for assignments to ensure that your coursework is handled by experts in the field. Our assignment writing examples provide a clear picture of the quality and structure we offer. Our writers, experienced in multiple fields, deliver unlimited assignment help for UK students, ensuring you get the support you need to succeed. Let us handle the hard work for you!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
fdgdg
