1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA RUBRIC FOR TASK 2 – MGT726 Task 2 The purpose of this task is to outline your progress to date and indicate the analysis and evaluation to be integrated in the final report. Product: Written Progress Report: 2000 words Marks possible: 100 (weighted at 30% of final grade) Learning Outcomes • Examine a specialist area of professional management practice. • Develop skills to analyse, evaluate and reflect critically on complex information, problems, concepts and theories in order to devise recommended solutions to a management issue. • Effectively communicate implications and conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Assessment Criteria 1. Problem definition including justification and background to the management issue, a clear statement of the Research Question (RQ) and the development of clear Research Objective(s) (RO) that will provide the information necessary to address the management issue. Feedback from task 1 has been incorporated (10 marks). 2. Identification and application of relevant theory to address the research objectives. Use of relevant secondary data from practitioner sources (40 marks). 3. Research design (RD) and method identified (qualitative, quantitative or mixed) and their suitability for the RO explained. Any issues around sampling/respondent selection for primary data detailed (30 marks). 4. Plan for the analysis of data outlined (10 marks). 5. Presentation Communication and Referencing (10 marks).Rubric for Assessment Criteria: Task 2 – MGT726 2 Criteria HD DN CR P F Marks possible 10 9 — 10 8 7 5 — 6 < 5 1. Problem definition including justification and background to the management issue, a clear statement of the Research Question (RQ) and the development of clear Research Objective(s) (RO) that will provide the information necessary to address the management issue. Feedback from task 1 has been incorporated Background to the management issue is clear and leads logically to the research question. Research objectives are clearly linked to the RQ and management issue and are clearly stated. All feedback from task 1 has been incorporated Background to the management issue is generally clear and leads logically to the research question. Research objectives are linked to the RQ and management issue but could be refined to be more focussed. Most feedback from task 1 has been incorporated Some background to the management issue is provided but further information is needed to clearly link to the management issue. Research objectives are clearly linked to the RQ and management issue and are clearly stated. Feedback from task 1 has been incorporated Limited background to the management issue is provided but further clarity is needed to link to the research question. Research objectives are clearly linked to the RQ and management issue and are clearly stated. Some feedback from task 1 has been incorporated Background to the management issue is limited (or is not provided) and does not link logically to the research question. Research objectives are not clearly linked to the RQ and management issue. Little/no attempt to incorporate feedback from task 1. Mark awarded Marks possible 40 36 — 40 30 — 35 26 — 29 20 — 25 < 20 2. Identification and application of relevant theory to address the research objectives Use of relevant secondary data from practitioner sources. Identifies and applies the most relevant theory(s) for the ROs and explains why it was selected above others. Draws information from a range of industry and academic sources. Pulls the ideas together and presents a coherent, well developed logical argument. Identifies and applies relevant theory(s) for the ROs. Draws on some relevant industry and academic information. Groups the ideas to a degree and provides an argument relating analysis to conclusion. Identifies and applies a theory that sheds some light on the ROs. Could better demonstrate relevance. Draws on some industry and academic information. Identifies but does not integrate relevant issues. Some logical argument. Tends to describe rather than analyse. Identifies and applies a theory that is not closely related to the ROs. Does not spell out how it is relevant. Uses little industry and academic information. Arguments are partial or not well supported. Little integration of ideas. Too much description. Identifies an unrelated theory. No use of industry or academic information, development or integration of arguments. Too descriptive. Marks awardedRubric for Assessment Criteria: Task 2 – MGT726 3 Marks possible 30 26 — 30 22 — 25 19 — 21 15 — 18 < 15 3. Research design (RD) and method identified (qualitative, quantitative or mixed) and their suitability for the RO explained. Any issues around sampling/respondent selection for primary data detailed. Appropriate research design clearly identified and justified in relation to ROs. Appropriate method(s) detailed with supporting instruments (eg draft questionnaires/interview protocols) clearly linked to ROs. Issues around sampling/respondent selection clearly and comprehensively detailed Appropriate research design identified with some/limited justification in relation to ROs. Appropriate method(s) identified with some details of supporting instruments (eg draft questionnaires/interview protocols) clearly linked to ROs. Issues around sampling/respondent selection discussed but further details could be provided Research design partially described with limited/no justification in relation to ROs. Some description of method(s) with little supporting details or links to ROs. Issues around sampling/respondent selection briefly identified but lacking in detail Research design not clearly identified or justified in relation to ROs. Some description of method(s) with little supporting details or links to ROs. Issues around sampling/respondent selection not clearly detailed. RD has not been identified or is not appropriate. NO explanation about suitability of RD. Limited information about proposed methods. Issues around sampling/respondent selection not detailed. Marks awarded Marks Possible 10 9 — 10 8 7 5 — 6 < 5 4. Plan for the analysis of data outlined. Comprehensive plan for analysis of data gathered through RD. Clearly structured for each RO, consideration of type and level of data. Includes dummy tables. Detailed plan for analysis of data gathered through RD with most key requirements included. Plan for analysis of data gathered through RD covers some of the required issues. Plan for analysis of data gathered through RD is not clear, however some issues around analysis are not addressed. No details of proposed analysis provided. Marks awarded Marks Possible 10 9 — 10 8 7 5 — 6 < 5 5. Presentation Communication and Referencing. Exceptionally high standard Error free Professional presentation, well written, appropriate use of referencing and a complete List of References. Comprehensive Executive Summary. High standard Very few errors Well presented, mostly clear expression, appropriate use of referencing and a complete List of References. Good Executive Summary. Good standard A few minor errors Scope to improve presentation and communication. Minor errors in referencing and List of References. Executive Summary could be improved. Satisfactory Several errors Scope to improve presentation, expression poor in places. No/incorrect referencing. Executive Summary does not summarise all areas of the report. Unsatisfactory Numerous errors Poorly presented, difficult to follow, with no/incorrect referencing. No Executive Summary provided/very poor summary. Marks awarded TotalRubric for Assessment Criteria: Task 2 – MGT726 4 Further feedback: