Data analysis and discussion
· Contains the analytical framework for the report project.
· What are the results of your data?
· How will you illustrate them (table, graphs, diagrams, …).
· If interview derived – often quotes may be used to support particular points raised.
· If questionnaire derived – we would expect some quantitative analysis.
· How do your results relate to findings of previous research/theories/models?
· Submission of Evidence of the Collected Data; Students need to submit the evidence (collected data) with their portfolio e.g. interview recordings and/or notes, data, analysis spreadsheets, screen shots and links to all the literature.
Generic Grading Descriptions
In the following table you will see what is expected of you in order to achieve a certain grade.
Mark
Achievement Level
Distinction
85-100%
a) Outstanding work showing extensive knowledge and understanding of an extensive range of relevant international business management trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, theories and data. Exceptional ability to analyse, synthesise, and evaluate.
b) Solutions and recommendations demonstrate strong ethical appreciation and deep understanding of the need for corporate responsibility.
c) Evidence of extensive reading, study and sense making beyond the course content, and of independent thought.
d) Writing that is fluent, clear, concise and grammatically correct. Tables, diagrams and other figures are highly effectively in supporting the text and presenting key messages.
e) Numeric analysis that is complete and free from errors with application of methods that may be insightful or original
f) A submission that is focused and relevant to the task, comprehensive, accurate, and presented in a very professional manner. Excellent use made of digital technology.
g) Demonstrates strong ability to pursue research at Doctoral Level.
h) Comprehensive, error free citations and reference list.
70-84%
a) Excellent work showing extensive knowledge and understanding of a considerable variety of international business management trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, theories and data. Good analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
b) Solutions and recommendations demonstrate ethical appreciation and awareness of the need for corporate responsibility.
c) Evidence of substantial reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and of independent thought.
d) Writing is fluent, clear, concise and grammatical. Strong use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages.
e) Numeric analysis that is complete and mostly free from errors with appropriate application of methods.
i) A submission that is relevant to the task, comprehensive, accurate, and presented in a well-structured and organised manner. Good use made of digital technology.
j) Demonstrates the ability to pursue research at Doctoral Level.
k) Comprehensive citations, and correct use of the Harvard style in the reference list.
Merit
60-69%
a) Good work showing wide knowledge and understanding of an extensive range of relevant business trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, and theories. Some analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
b) Ethics and corporate responsibility questions are considered.
c) Questions of ethics and corporate responsibility are addressed appropriately.
d) Reference made to relevant course material with evidence of some reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and some independent thought.
e) Writing is clear, mostly concise, and has few grammatical errors. Good use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages.
f) Numeric analysis that is complete and mostly free from errors with relevant and effective application of methods.
g) A submission that is relevant to the task though less than completely comprehensive, is mostly accurate, and is well presented. Mostly good use of digital technology.
h) Effective use of citations and a complete reference list. Some minor errors in use of the Harvard style
Pass
50-59%
a) Adequate work showing reasonable knowledge and understanding of relevant business issues, concepts, and theories. Limited analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
b) There is some clear but limited consideration of ethics and corporate responsibility.
c) Little or no evidence of reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and little or no independent thought.
d) Writing is less than clear, is not concise and has some grammatical errors. Some use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages.
e) Numeric analysis that is mostly complete and free from significant or critical errors with appropriate application of methods
f) A submission that is mostly relevant to the task and reasonably accurate, but not very comprehensive and with some errors and shortcomings of presentation, structure and organisation. Basic use of digital technology in the creation and presentation of the work.
g) Adequate citation and reference list. Some errors in use of the Harvard style and some missing citations.
Fail
40-49%
a) A weak piece of work showing only limited knowledge and understanding of course content with substantial errors or omissions. Mainly descriptive with little or no analysis, synthesis and evaluation, and no independent thought.
b) Ethical and corporate responsibility issues are not considered.
c) Evidence of a range of sources but with reliance on inappropriate sources without critical evaluation.
d) Writing is not clear and has frequent grammatical errors.
e) Numeric analysis that is mostly complete but contains errors with significant effect, or methods that are applied inappropriately
f) Much of the submission is not relevant to the task. Lacking in professionalism, weak presentation, poorly structured and organised. Ineffective use of digital technology in the creation of the work.
g) Limited citation and reference list.
30-39%
A poor piece of work with extensive errors and omissions, badly written and ungrammatical. A
little relevant material but poorly presented with little evidence of understanding. Weak use of digital technology.
0-29%
A very poor piece of work lacking in understanding and with serious errors and omissions but with evidence of some knowledge vaguely relevant to the question.