Order this Assignment Now: £149 VALID THRU: 25-Jan-2025
Write a literature review for one of the following organisations: BD Network Spaghetti House ALLOCATE SOFTWARE LIMITED Wilderness Scotland Atom ICP Nurseries Samaritans
ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Assessment
Literature Review
Assessment code:
010
Academic Year:
2022/2023
Trimester:
1
Module Title:
Undergraduate Major Project – Integrated Case Study
Module Code:
MOD003463
Level:
6
Module Leader:
William Jefferies
Weighting:
20%
Word Limit:
2000
This excludes bibliography and other items listed in rule 6.75 of the Academic Regulations: h tt p : // w eb .an g l i a.ac .u k /anet /ac ad em i c /p u b l i c /ac ad em i c _r egs .p d f
Assessed Learning Outcomes
1-5
Submission Deadline:
Please refer to the deadline on the VLE
WRITING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:
This assignment must be completed individually.
You must use the Harvard referencing system.
Your work must indicate the number of words you have used. Written assignments must not exceed the specified maximum number of words. When a written assignment is marked, the excessive use of words beyond the word limit is reflected in the academic judgement of the piece of work which results in a lower mark being awarded for the piece of work (regulation 6.74).
Assignment submissions are to be made anonymously. Do not write your name anywhere on your work.
Write your student ID number at the top of every page.
Where the assignment comprises more than one task, all tasks must be submitted in a single document.
You must number all pages.
SUBMITTING YOUR ASSIGNMENT: In order to achieve full marks, you must submit your work before the deadline. Work that is submitted late – if your work is submitted on the same day as the deadline by midnight, your mark will receive a 10% penalty. If you submit your work up to two working days after the published submission deadline – it will be accepted and marked. However, the element of the module’s assessment to which the work contributes will be capped with a maximum mark of 40%.
Work cannot be submitted if the period of 2 working days after the deadline has passed (unless there is an approved extension). Failure to submit within the relevant period will mean that you have failed the assessment.
Requests for short-term extensions will only be considered in the case of illness or other cause considered valid by the Director of Studies Team. Please contact DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. A request must normally be received and agreed by the Director of Studies Team in writing at least 24 hours prior to the deadline. See rules 6.64-6.73: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
Exceptional Circumstances: The deadline for submission of mitigation in relation to this assignment is no later than five working days after the submission date of this work. Please contact the Director of Studies Team - DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. See rules 6.112 – 6.141: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
ASSIGNMENT QUESTION Write a literature review for o n e of the following organisations:
The Literature Review must include the following sections
Abstract
Introduction
Presentation of data
Presentation of models and theories
Discussion
Reference list
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA and MARKS
To pass this assignment you must satisfactorily complete all elements of the literature review.
Research and investigation – 40 marks
Develop a systematic approach to searching for literature/evidence
Use a search strategy effectively, including qualitative and quantitative data
Identify at least 20 appropriate sources to support your research
Analysis and use of models and theories – 40 marks
Outline key findings from data
Analyse the data with models and theories from appropriate journal articles and monographs
Formatting and Referencing – 20 marks
Situate your sources within the Hierarchy of Sources
Use Anglia Ruskin Harvard referencing correctly with relevant and appropriate sources
ARU GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS: LEVEL 6 – the Depth stage
Level 6 is characterised by an expectation of students’ increasing autonomy in relation to their study and developing skill sets. Students are expected to demonstrate problem solving skills, both theoretical and practical. This is supported by an understanding of appropriate theory; creativity of expression and thought based in individual judgement; and the ability to seek out, invoke, analyse and evaluate competing theories or methods of working in a critically constructive and open manner. Output is articulate, coherent and skilled in the appropriate medium, with some students producing original or
innovative work in their specialism.
Mark Bands
Outcome
Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band for ARU’s Generic
Learning Outcomes (Academic Regulations, Section 2)
Knowledge &
Understanding
Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and
Transferable Skills
90-
100%
Achieves module outcome(s)
Exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with extraordinary originality and autonomy. Work may be considered for publication within
ARU
Exceptional management of learning resources, with a higher degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the assessment brief. Exceptional structure/ accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Exceptional team/practical/professional skills. Work may be considered for publication within ARU
80-
89%
Outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with clear originality and autonomy
Outstanding management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the assessment brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Outstanding team/practical/professional skills
70-
79%
Excellent knowledge base that supports analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/ practice/ethics of discipline with
considerable originality
Excellent management of learning resources, with degree of autonomy/research that may exceed the assessment brief. Structured and creative expression. Excellent academic/ intellectual skills and practical/team/ professional/
problem-solving skills
60-
69%
Good knowledge base that supports analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/ practice/ethics of discipline with
some originality
Good management of learning resources, with consistent self-directed research. Structured and accurate expression. Good academic/intellectual skills and team/practical/ professional/problem solving skills
50-
59%
Sound knowledge base that supports some analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/practice/ethics of discipline
Sound management of learning resources. Some autonomy in research but inconsistent. Structured and mainly accurate expression. Sound level of academic/ intellectual skills going beyond description at times. Sound
team/practical/professional/problem-solving skills
40-
49%
A marginal pass in module outcome(s)
Adequate knowledge base with some omissions at the level of ethical/ theoretical issues.
Restricted ability to discuss theory and/or or solve problems in
discipline
Adequate use of learning resources with little autonomy. Some difficulties with academic/ intellectual skills. Some difficulty with structure/ accuracy in expression, but evidence of developing team/practical/professional/ problem-solving skills
30-
39%
A marginal fail in module outcome(s).
Satisfies default qualifying
mark
Limited knowledge base. Limited understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline
Limited use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Limited academic/ intellectual skills. Still mainly descriptive. General difficulty with structure/ accuracy in expression. Practical/ professional/problem-solving skills that are not yet secure
20-
29%
Fails to achieve module outcome(s) Qualifying mark not satisfied
Little evidence of knowledge base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline/ ethical issues. Significant difficulty with theory and problem solving in
discipline
Little evidence of use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Little evidence of academic/ intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive.
Significant difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression.
Little evidence of practical/professional/ problem-solving skills
10-
19%
Deficient knowledge base. Deficient understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Major difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline
Deficient use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Deficient input to teams. Deficient academic/intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive. Major difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression.
Deficient practical/professional/problem-solving skills
1-
9%
No evidence of knowledge base; no evidence of understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Total inability with theory and problem solving in discipline
No evidence of use of learning resources. Completely unable to work autonomously. No evidence of input to teams. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. Work wholly descriptive. Incoherent structure/accuracy and expression. No evidence of practical/professional/ problem-
solving skills
0%
Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student
fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes
Order this Assignment Now:£149
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions
