Explain the micro and macro context of why this reviewed topic may be of particular significance / importance to you or others engaged in your professional or academic research area.
|
Assignment Task: Your task is to write a thematic literature review The impact of financial inclusion policies on economic growth and social stability using the format below as a guide.
|
||||
|
|
Specific Objectives (state in more specific terms what you will be trying to achieve.) The principal objective(s) in undertaking this research is / will be to: MAX 100 WORDS |
|
||
|
|
Literature Review (Identify academic sources of information, material, ideas that demonstrate different approaches in your topic area related to your specific objective. Reflect and discuss the influence that these have had on the development of your choice of final research literature by which you might ground and investigate your objective. Please give the full reference of the sources (Harvard style). MAX 2200 WORDS IN TOTAL |
|
|
||
|
Unit Learning Outcomes Assessed.
|
||
|
Assignment Details and Instructions. Format: Word document Line spacing: 2.0 Justify Font: 12 pt Times New Roman Structure: See the suggested pro forma References listed alphabetically at the end. |
||
|
Early Career/ World Class Professional Skills (PLOs) being assessed or developed/assessed. None |
||
|
Marking Criteria * See below and note the penalties for excessive word count. Penalties for Overlong Assessments All final assessments are subject to the following mark reduction penalties:
The maximum assessment length does not include the bibliography, reference lists, title page or any appendices. The penalties above apply equally to all submitted written assignments, oral, audio or video presentations, posters, portfolios, and any other assessments. The mark for overlong assessments will not be reduced below the pass threshold. No penalties apply where assessments do not achieve the pass threshold, even if the work is in excess of the provided guidance. |
|
|
0 - 45 |
45 – 49 (MARGINAL) |
50 - 59 |
60 - 69 |
70 - 79 |
80 - 100 |
|
1. Identifies the macro /micro context for the proposed research and presents a clear rationale for its pursuit. |
The context and current issues are not identified leading to no clear research objectives. |
The context and current issues are partially identified, leading to objectives that are inappropriate or imprecise. |
The context and current issues are sufficiently identified and expressed, but lacks clarity in some areas, leading to an adequate but somewhat loose identification of research objectives. |
The context and current issues are clearly identified and scoped, leading to the identification of appropriate research objectives. |
The context and current issues are unambiguously identified, scoped and prioritized, leading to well framed research objectives. |
The context and current issues identified are theoretically grounded. Factual data are well used to iterate the scenario that leads to precisely framed research objectives.
|
|
2. The research objectives / hypothesis are /is clear and precisely framed. |
Incomplete, lacking in originality Not available |
Poorly articulated, and not enough originality |
Articulated and expressed but lacks clarity in some areas |
Clearly articulated and expressed |
Fully articulated and well expressed |
Original, clearly articulated and well expressed |
|
3. Critically review and synthesize the relevant literature on the subject area. |
Not identified
|
Partially addressed, although insufficient theory considered and this was not integrated. Opinion based |
Satisfactory range of literature considered, analysis has some critical focus and is integrated with the literature |
A good range literature considered and comprehensively utilised |
Critical application and critique of concepts with evidence of breadth and depth of literature reviewed and integrated |
Outstanding Critical application and critique of concepts with evidence of breadth and depth of literature reviewed and integrated |
|
4. Potential weaknesses wrt to the literature review are fully recognised |
Not identified |
Partially identified and opinion based |
Identified with some critical focus |
Clearly identified with critical focus and well articulated |
Fully articulated and identified with a clear focus tentative solutions. |
Fully articulated and identified with a clear focus and innovative solutions. |
|
5.Presentation |
Inadequate presentation with inconsistent referencing and muddled structure inappropriate writing style |
Poor presentation inconsistent referencing and citations and unclear structure and/or inappropriate writing style |
Satisfactory referencing. Reasonably structured and clear, reasonably fluent writing style. |
Clear, accurate and consistent referencing. Clear, well linked structure. Fluently written. |
Excellent referencing and clear structure with strong links between sections. Fluent and convincing. |
Outstanding referencing and clear structure with strong links between sections. Fluent and extremely convincing. |
|
What was done well |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A key area(s) to improve this assignment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
