1

Lord Ashcroft International Business School

Postgraduate Major Project Department: Leadership and Management Module Codes: MOD001170 Academic Year: 2015 Semester/Trimester: 2

2

CONTENTS

1. KEY INFORMATION ...................................................................................................................................... 3

2. INTRODUCTION TO THE MODULE ................................................................................................................ 4

3. INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES ................................................................................................................ 4

4. OUTLINE DELIVERY ....................................................................................................................................... 6

4.1 ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 7 4.2 SUPERVISION .................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.3 ETHICS APPROVAL - THE USE OF PRIMARY DATA: QUESTIONNAIRES, SURVEYS, INTERVIEWS, FOCUS GROUPS ETC. ................... 7

5. CHOOSING A TOPIC, ISSUE, PROBLEM OR QUESTION ..................................................................................10

5.1 A NOTE ON THE USE OF QUESTIONNAIRES AND SURVEYS ........................................................................................... 10

6. USING SOURCES AND REFERENCING ...........................................................................................................11

6.1. EXAMPLE OF HARVARD REFERENCING ................................................................................................................. 11 6.2. GOOD SCHOLARSHIP, REFERENCING AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT ............................................................................ 12 6.3. WHAT IS GOOD SCHOLARSHIP? .......................................................................................................................... 12 6.4. WHAT DO I REFERENCE? .................................................................................................................................. 13

7. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS ...................................................................................13

7.1 SUBMITTING YOUR WORK [STUDENTS IN ALL OTHER LOCATIONS AT ASSOCIATE COLLEGES] ............................................. 16 7.2 FEEDBACK ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 7.3 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................................... 17 7.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF A POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION ........................................................................................... 17

8. HOW IS MY WORK MARKED? ......................................................................................................................19

8.1 RE-ASSESSMENT (RESIT) .................................................................................................................................... 21

9. ASSESSMENT OFFENCES ..............................................................................................................................21

10. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STUDENT ..........................................................................................................27

11. SECURITY ..................................................................................................................................................27

12. LEARNING RESOURCES ..............................................................................................................................28

APPENDIX 1: DISSERTATION PROPOSAL COVERSHEET ....................................................................................29

APPENDIX 2: PRODUCING AND SUBMITTING YOUR DISSERTATION PROPOSAL ..............................................30

APPENDIX 3: HOW TO STRUCTURE YOUR DISSERTATION PROPOSAL ..............................................................31

APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL ........................................................................................33

APPENDIX 5: ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS - LEVEL 7 ...........................................................................................................................................................37

APPENDIX 6: LAIBS POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION ASSESSMENT FORM .......................................................38

APPENDIX 7: LAIBS SUPERVISOR CONTACT LOG .............................................................................................39

APPENDIX 8: RESEARCH ETHICS APPLICATION FORM (STAGE 1) .....................................................................41

APPENDIX 9: ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY: RESEARCH ETHICS APPLICATION FORM (STAGE 2) .......................46

APPENDIX 10: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET .........................................................................................51

APPENDIX 11: PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM .................................................................................................53

3

1. Key Information

Module/Unit title: Postgraduate Major Project

Postgraduate Major Project Leader: Dr Teng Guan Khoo MAB301 Lord Ashcroft Building Chelmsford +44 845196 6839 Ten-guan.khoo@anglia.ac.uk

Every module has a Module Definition Form (MDF) which is the officially validated record of the module.

You can access the MDF for this module in four ways via:

The Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)

The My.Anglia Module Catalogue at www.anglia.ac.uk/modulecatalogue

Anglia Ruskin’s module search engine facility at www.anglia.ac.uk/modules

As the final section of this module guide

All modules delivered by Anglia Ruskin University at its main campuses in the UK and at Associate

Colleges throughout the UK and overseas are governed by the Academic Regulations. You can view

these at www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs.

In the unlikely event of any discrepancy between the Academic Regulations and any other publication,

including this module guide, the Academic Regulations, as the definitive document, take precedence

over all other publications and will be applied in all cases.

4

2. Introduction to the Module

In order to obtain a Masters degree you must prepare, submit, and pass a dissertation. Apart from this

regulation requirement there are a number of reasons why the dissertation is a very important part of

your studies. From the learning outcomes in the module definition forms (attached at the end of this

guide) you will see that the dissertation is a demanding module. Perhaps a more attractive way of

stating this is to say that it allows you an opportunity to demonstrate, at an advanced level, several

important intellectual and practical skills. These skills are valued by employers and as the dissertation

is your own work it is proof that you have mastered them. In fact, sometimes your dissertation will help

you to obtain an interview or find the position you want.

The dissertation is not a taught module and this means that the research and writing up of your findings

is very much an individual effort that allows you to demonstrate both organisational and time

management skills. You will have further honed your research skills and techniques and deepened your

understanding of at least one major area of business and/or business related areas. Other high level

skills which will be developed and improved include evaluation, synthesis, and critical thinking. Finally,

a well-written dissertation enables you to demonstrate communication and presentation skills.

Full details of how to present your dissertation can be found in the Anglia Ruskin University publication,

"Presentation and Submission of Projects and Dissertations for Taught Higher Degrees". A copy of this

booklet can be obtained from the VLE. You are advised to make yourself aware of the entire contents

of this booklet before you start your dissertation. You should read carefully the section on Formatting

before you start any writing-up, as your dissertation will not be accepted if it doesn't comply with this

section. Anglia Ruskin University regulations and guidelines do change from time to time. It is your

responsibility to make sure that you are working to current regulations and guidelines so check that the

Module Guide and Anglia Ruskin University publications you are using are up-to-date. If in doubt consult

your supervisor and/or the LS Academic Office on arusupport@lseducationgroup.com.

3. Intended Learning Outcomes

Anglia Ruskin modules are taught on the basis of intended learning outcomes and that, on successful

completion of the module, students will be expected to be able to demonstrate they have met those

outcomes.

No. Type On successful completion of this module the student will be

expected to be able to:

1 Knowledge and

understanding

With reference to a chosen significant and complex area for

enquiry establish a method for investigation / exploration of key

concepts, models and principles. (University outcome)

2 Knowledge and

understanding

Critically evaluate complex issues from a variety of viewpoints

3 Knowledge and

understanding

Develop effective arguments to support relevant conclusions

4 Intellectual, practical,

affective and

transferable skills

Critically justify and rigorously apply appropriate methodologies,

techniques and practical strategies; being sensitive to the context.

(University outcome)

5 Intellectual, practical,

affective and

transferable skills

Where appropriate formulate solutions to business or

management problems in discussion with peers, clients, mentors

and others.

6 Intellectual, practical,

affective and

transferable skills

Reflect critically on the process and outcomes of the

investigation/enquiry.

5

You will have gained some idea of what is required in a postgraduate dissertation from the learning

outcomes of the module and from the assessment criteria below. In general terms we expect an

emphasis on the critical literature review and an in-depth understanding of theory and methodology.

Specifically,

Methodology - you will be expected to critically review the theoretical, empirical, and methodology

literature. The theory should be comprehensively discussed and understood, and paradigms of

inquiry and different methodologies should be explored. You should show awareness of the

soundness of the methodology you use and its rationale.

Problem formulation - you will need to be precise and rigorous about the problem formulation and

the setting of objectives. Relevance and originality in the choice of topic is also important.

Content and Analysis - your dissertation should clearly meet stated objectives and indicate the

extent that arguments are based on valid and reliable evidence, and identified and worked within a

critically analysed theoretical framework.

Evaluation of Implications - the evaluation of the implications in the dissertation, based upon the

analysis undertaken and upon any data collected, should be of high quality and aim for originality.

Presentation - your dissertation should be well-structured in terms of both paragraphs and

chapters. There should be attention to detail, expression should be clear, the title appropriate, and

arguments coherent. Any appendices (and you are encouraged to keep these to a minimum) should

be used. The same applies to references and the bibliography. Tables and diagrams should be of

a high standard and make use of appropriate software.

6

4. Outline Delivery There are a number of formal processes associated with the dissertation.

Registering your dissertation topic - This must be done by submitting a completed Dissertation Proposal Coversheet (Provided in Appendix 1), along with your outline Dissertation Proposal to the LS Learning Portal by the published date. An example proposal is provided in Appendix 4. It is important that you submit your coversheet and proposal on time.

Allocating your supervisor - A Supervisor will be allocated to you. If you are an online student, the supervisor will contact you on your personal e-mail.

Meeting your supervisor – If you are a full time student, you are strongly advised to meet/ contact your supervisor as soon as possible. You should meet/contact your supervisor regularly to discuss progress, resolve any problems you may have, etc. It is your responsibility to make and keep the appointments. If you have any problems in making appointments then please inform your Programme Leader immediately. Sometimes face-to-face meetings are not possible. In this case other means of communication, such as email, may be appropriate. If you are an online student, you are required to contact your supervisor through the provided supervisor e-mail.

Recording your meetings - You must keep a record of your meetings with your supervisor on the Contact Log Sheet (CLS) and the completed CLS must be attached with your dissertation when handing in. For online students, the Academic office will do the needful in collecting supervisor signatures.

Submitting your dissertation

Part Type of assessment

% Weighting

Word or page limit

Submission method Submission dates Key contact person

1

Dissertation (Final Submission)

100%

MBA

15,000 words

LSM Submission Website

http://www.lsmsubmissions.com

September 2015

In addition, follow email

correspondence for deadlines and any possible revisions.

Supervisor

7

4.1 Attendance requirements

Attending all your classes/online activities and webinars is very important and one of the best ways to help you succeed in this module. Research has found a clear correlation between student attendance and overall performance. In accordance with the Student Charter, you are expected to arrive on time and take an active part in all your timetabled webinar and other online activities. For further details contact Joanna Shear at arusupport@lseducationgroup.com. London School of Marketing will closely monitor the attendance of all students. Continued absence can result in various consequences including the termination of your registration as you will be considered to have withdrawn from your studies. International students who are non-EEA nationals and in possession of entry clearance/leave to remain as a student (student visa) are required to be in regular attendance at London School of Marketing. Failure to do so is considered to be a breach of national immigration regulations. London School of Marketing, like all British Universities, is statutorily obliged to inform the UK Border Agency of the Home Office of significant unauthorised absences by any student visa holders.

4.2 Supervision

Based on your proposal, you will be allocated a supervisor who will provide general guidance and help. Extensive reading and commenting on draft chapters is not included in the role of the supervisor. (It is a University regulation that only a maximum of 20% of a draft can be read by the Supervisor). Students should provide their supervisor with a brief outline of their proposed dissertation, line of inquiry etc. as soon as possible. Following this, your supervisor will discuss the presentation and methodology of the dissertation, possible titles, and give guidance on how to focus the work. Supervisors are not required to be expert in the chosen topic. Students are entitled to a maximum of 4 hours of supervision over the period in which the dissertation is being written. Normally, it will be advantageous if this is divided into a number of shorter periods. You are strongly advised to make full use of these consultation sessions. Supervisors will indicate their availability and students must then make arrangements for supervision sessions. In Appendix 7 you will find a Supervisor Contact Log and Supervisor Change Form. It is required to complete the relevant fields and submit this form with your completed dissertation. Your supervisor will expect to receive regular reports on your progress. It is important that you provide your Supervisor with detailed evidence of your progress for two reasons: the assistance he/she can give will be limited in the absence of information; and, if you submit a document which your supervisor cannot vouch for as your own work because you have not provided evidence to him/her during the course of your research, you will have to undergo a viva voce examination.There may also be additional opportunities for attending group sessions on various specific aspects of the dissertation – look out for information on these sessions.

4.3 Ethics Approval - the use of primary data: questionnaires, surveys, interviews, focus groups etc.

If you decide to undertake primary research (a questionnaire, survey, interview, focus group etc.) you must seek the approval of your supervisor on the following issues:

Ethics (this is very important as your research is likely to involve contact with humans – please see Appendices 8-11)

Aim of the questionnaire or survey

Target population

Sample size

Sampling method*

Number and type of questions

Discussion of the limitations of the questionnaire/survey

8

Statistical methodology used for analysis (e.g. using MS Excel, SPSS) You must submit all completed questionnaires/survey/notes/transcripts with your dissertation. (These do not have to be bound into your dissertation.) If you conducted an observational survey then you must submit your original notes and comments with your dissertation. (An example of an observational survey might be counting the number of people purchasing food from a hot-dog stand on a wet Sunday afternoon in Benwick.) * Random samples are those in which each member of the target population has an equal chance of being selected: it requires each individual to be numbered and then selected using random number tables. Even then the method can be flawed and prone to bias which requires complicated statistical techniques to overcome. Standing on a street corner interviewing likely people for an hour on a Saturday morning is not a taking a random sample. This form of sampling is ‘ad hoc’ or ‘opportunistic’.

Research ethical approval system

When is ethical approval required? Students undertaking major project modules which include elements of assessment based on research involving the collection of primary empirical data must comply with Anglia Ruskin University’s ethical approval requirements. Why does research need ethical approval? There are a number of reasons why you need to obtain ethical approval, including:

to protect the participants, as well as yourself as the researcher and the reputation of Anglia

Ruskin University and its Associate Colleges

in order that you are insured to carry the research out.

Research which involves human participants, their tissues or data will always require ethical approval. Anglia Ruskin University also requires other types of research to undergo ethical review, including the following:

risk of damage to the environment

risk of damage or disturbance to culturally, spiritually or historically significant artefacts or places or human remains

political or social sensitivity.

The ethical review system applies to all students and staff at Anglia Ruskin University and all students at our Franchise Associate Colleges. Students at other Associate Colleges need to check requirements. You must comply with Anglia Ruskin University’s Research Ethics Policy and Code of Practice for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia Ruskin University available at: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/faculties/laibs/Research/7_research_ethics.phtml Research undertaken in the name of Anglia Ruskin University and its Franchise Associate Colleges where ethical approval has not been obtained is a serious matter which could adversely affect our reputation. Such behaviour may be construed as misconduct or gross misconduct and may be dealt with under the Student Disciplinary Procedures. Ethics committee structure Each faculty at Anglia Ruskin University has a Faculty Research Ethics Panel (FREP), which reviews higher risk research. There are also Departmental Research Ethics Panels (DREPs) in each faculty, which review lower risk research. Students need to submit their ethics application to the relevant FREP/DREP. Contact details can be found here: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/faculties/laibs/Research/7_research_ethics.phtml Ethical approval procedure The Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) needs to be completed for all research* as a minimum requirement (see Appendix 8). Further approval may be required.

9

According to the responses given on the form, research is classified into risk-category 1, 2 or 3. If research falls into risk-category 1, the Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) needs to be submitted to the appropriate DREP for their records only. Risk-category 2 research requires a light-touch review by two members of the appropriate DREP whereas risk-category 3 is the highest risk research and has to be reviewed at a FREP meeting. The Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) can be downloaded from: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/faculties/laibs/Research/7_research_ethics.phtml You also need to refer to the Research Ethics Policy and other ethics guidance, including the Question-Specific Advice for the Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) and the Code of Practice for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia Ruskin University. *except for those solely using animal subjects, where the animal checklist must be completed. This is available from the Faculty of Science and Technology ethics website.

Completing the Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) When completing the application form, please ensure that you have filled in Section 1: Researcher and Project Details, including ticking the boxes to indicate that you have understood and agree with each of the confirmation statements. You also need to complete the project summary box at the end of the page. You then need to complete Section 2: Research Ethics Checklist. Please then refer to the flow chart in Section 3: Approval Process. This indicates which route for ethical approval you need to follow. The research ethics review procedure is a risk-based approach. If you are applying for NHS, Social Care or Ministry of Justice ethical approval, these approvals are accepted as equivalent to our own, but the FREP will need to be sent a copy of the relevant letters. The process for these external approvals is covered in the checklist. For risk-category 2 projects only, researchers need to complete Section 4 and also submit the participant information sheet and consent form as a minimum requirement. Further information such as permission letters from organisations may also be required in some instances. If your research falls into risk-category 3, please speak to your Dissertation Supervisor and FREP Chair in the first instance, given the approval process for this type of research is longer. For risk-category 3 only (high risk) projects, researchers need to complete the Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 2) and submit all the documents they will be using for their research, including, as applicable. (Appendices 9-11).

participant information sheet

participant consent form

recruitment poster

travel insurance (travel registration form)

risk assessment

local ethical approval, e.g. if carrying out research in other organisations or outside of the UK

written permission from organisations where you are carrying the research out

equipment checks

research visas, permits or other permissions if carrying out research oversea

intellectual property agreements.

You must also ensure that you have obtained a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) Check if required. Please see:www.anglia.ac.uk/apply/dbschecks

10

Further details regarding these permissions are in the Code of Practice for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia Ruskin University. Research ethics compulsory training It is compulsory for all undergraduate and masters students at Anglia Ruskin University to complete on-line ethics training and to successfully complete the quiz at the end of this, prior to submitting your ethics application. The confirmation that you have successfully completed the quiz needs to be included with your ethics application. If you need further information about the training, please speak to your Dissertation Supervisor. The link to access the VLE for the training is below: https://vle.anglia.ac.uk/sites/non-mod/ethics1/Pages/Home3.aspx You need to complete the training by the end of week 5.

5. Choosing a Topic, Issue, Problem or Question

You choose your own topic but it has to be approved by the supervisor. You can choose a similar topic to which may have been assessed for another module as long as it does not cover identical ground. At this stage you would already be having an approved title for RMBM. It is required that the dissertation be carried out on the same title (modifications can be made on special occasions, however with Supervisor approval). As a start, remind yourself that a dissertation is much more than just a simple descriptive account of some aspect of your course. Very often the success of your dissertation is determined by how successful you are in finding a good issue to pursue, a problem to investigate, a question to answer, and so on. Unless you are successful here you may be unable to develop a coherent and well argued dissertation. This first stage can be difficult so don't be afraid to spend some time on it. You may come up with a fairly broad topic but it will have to have a focus. Even at the broad topic stage you will have to ask yourself whether it is likely to be viable. You should also try to come up with a topic you are interested in personally, as a large amount of your time will be spent on background reading, fieldwork and/or other types of research, and finally writing up your research. If you are interested in your question, etc., then all this activity is likely to be a source of pleasure rather than an onerous and pointless burden. The activity associated with choosing the topic, problem, etc., should be done before you submit your Dissertation Proposal. Sometimes, even after much hard work, it may be difficult to come up with a focused topic, but please note that a broad general area may not be acceptable. You are advised to seek some specialist help before submitting your proposal if you run into difficulties. You are strongly advised to spend a good deal of time on choosing your topic. You will probably find it helpful to discuss possibilities with other students, and try out an initial literature search in areas you are considering. Even something quite simple such as writing out the nature of the problem or topic can be helpful at this stage. You are allowed to modify your topic, research question, etc., (and any necessary changes to your methodology) if you experience problems with your original intentions, your research throws up better and more interesting possibilities, and so on. Very occasionally, you may have to abandon your topic and change to something completely different but this is regarded as being exceptional.

5.1 A note on the use of questionnaires and surveys

If you decide to undertake a questionnaire or survey you must seek the approval of your supervisor on the following issues:

Ethics (this is very important as your research is likely to involve contact with humans – please see Appendixes 5-7)

11

Aim of the questionnaire or survey

Target population

Sample size

Sampling method*

Number and type of questions

Discussion of the limitations of the questionnaire/survey

Statistical methodology used for analysis (e.g. using MS Excel, SPSS) You must submit all completed questionnaires/survey with your dissertation. (These do not have to be bound into your dissertation.) If you conducted an observational survey then you must submit your original notes and comments with your dissertation. (An example of an observational survey might be counting the number of people purchasing food from a hot-dog stand on a wet Sunday afternoon in Benwick.) * Random samples are those in which each member of the target population has an equal chance of being selected: it requires each individual to be numbered and then selected using random number tables. Even then the method can be flawed and prone to bias which requires complicated statistical techniques to overcome. Standing on a street corner interviewing likely people for an hour on a Saturday morning is not a taking a random sample. This form of sampling is ‘ad hoc’ or ‘opportunistic’.

6. Using Sources and Referencing

Do not forget that a dissertation depends crucially on source material. From the assessment criteria listed in a later section of this document you will see that you will be evaluated on the way you use your sources. Thus, before you finalise your topic and title, make sure that adequate and appropriate sources are available. This is particularly important if empirical research is a part of your dissertation. For instance, response rates to student questionnaires are often poor and/or slow. Your dissertation may depend mainly on primary sources such as surveys, interviews, statistics, etc. Many dissertations depend more on secondary sources such as books, articles, and the internet. As you can see from the assessment criteria below, supervisors will look for evidence that you have located a good selection of appropriate sources and understood them. Make sure that you have acknowledged these sources. If you don't this will be viewed as passing off other people’s words and ideas as your own, i.e. cheating, and you will be penalised for this dishonesty. Good references are an indication that you have found and used available sources and this will be taken into account when your dissertation is marked. As all quotations and paraphrases must be acknowledged this means that you will need to keep careful records of your research and reading. The use of references can cause difficulties. You must use the Harvard System of Referencing. The essence of this system is that whenever you quote from a primary or secondary source you add in brackets, immediately after the quotation, the surname of the author, the year of publication, and the page reference. The referencing system outlined can be found at the following website: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/subjects/reference/harvard.php

6.1. Example of Harvard referencing

Carter persisted with the ‘responsible’ import based recovery programme, hoping that the Germans and Japanese would ultimately follow their example. As a consequence of this policy the US trade deficit increased from $9.5 billion in 1976 to $31.1 billion in 1977 (Stein 1998, p159). (Stein 1998, p159) would appear after a direct quotation, or as in this case, the presentation of an idea. Direct quotes of more than 30 words or so should be indented on either side.

12

Example: In my view, and notwithstanding some of the really important theoretical insights and results that the concept has generated, there are problems in trying to apply the concept of utility that have not had the attention they deserve. However, economists are now beginning to take more interest in the extent to which psychological evidence can inform the development of economic models.

(Anand, 2006, p223) All books etc. you have cited in the text are listed in a reference list at the end of the dissertation in alphabetical order: author, initials, date, title, place of publication, publisher. Stein would thus appear as:

Stein, J (1998) The Locomotive Loses Power: The Trade and Industrial Policies of Jimmy Carter; in Fink, G & Graham, HD (eds) The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post New-Deal Era, Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas.

Note that this is a chapter in a publication edited by someone else. The full volume also needs to be cited thus:

Fink, G & Graham, HD (1998) The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post New-Deal Era, Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas.

Note the use of italics in these two examples. It is always the title of the book that is italicised. All books etc. you have cited in the text are listed in a bibliography at the end of the dissertation in alphabetical order: author, initials, title, publisher, date. Mansfield would appear as:

Mansfield, E.; Microeconomics: Theory & Applications, Norton and Company, 1995 If there is more than one book, journal article etc. by the same author your references will normally be distinguished by the year of publication. If the author has published more than one work in the same year, show them as 1992a, 1992b etc. Ensure that your document is spell-checked and pay particular attention to grammatical and punctuation errors.

6.2. Good scholarship, referencing and academic misconduct

In your project, as with all academic work you will be expected to demonstrate a high standard of academic referencing. To recap, this is for three reasons:

1. To show the breadth and depth of research you have carried out (e.g. get good marks!) 2. To enable the reader to follow up on interesting ideas/research that you have discussed 3. To avoid being accused of plagiarism.

As a level 7 student you should know all of the following information, but experience tells us that it is useful to include a re-cap.

6.3. What is good scholarship?

Academics (including you!) are engaged in the generation of new knowledge and insights that contribute to what we already know about the natural, supernatural and social world – this is called ‘scholarship’. Good scholarship is the result of conventions that help the readers of academic research to see exactly what is new, what is the work of others and how it all fits together – the main way this is done is through the referencing system. Put simply, authors (including you) need to make it clear what are not their own ‘new’ ideas, by adding a citation after every idea or set of ideas they write about that are not their own. There are several different ways of doing this that have evolved from different academic disciplines (just as there are lots of different world languages). In the Business School we use the Harvard Referencing System. An excellent resource about referencing can also be found at the following website: http://www.learnhigher.org.uk/site/index.php We suggest that you select ‘in depth’ mode from the drop-down menu on the bottom left of the page.

13

6.4. What do I reference?

As the above section suggests, you should attribute all your sources regardless of the medium the material comes in (e.g. You Tube video, journal article, blog, radio programme, book chapter etc.) There is a general rule of thumb that says that which is ‘common knowledge’ does not need to be referenced, but of course, what counts as common knowledge? So-called ‘common sense’ hides many assertions and prejudices that good quality academic work should seek to expose. A useful technique to use if you want to include general assertions is to use constructions like:

‘It is generally accepted that……’ or, ‘Arguably,’ or ‘It is reasonable to assume…’ But do take care, even assertions need some justification in the text to be credible. It is also a good idea to completely avoid cutting and pasting text from the internet, even if you correctly enclose a paragraph in quotation marks and add the reference underneath, you are unlikely to get many marks since this is not your own work and does not demonstrate your understanding. Quotations are good to see, but use them judiciously for the above reasons. If you can say it just as well yourself, write it in your own words and add the citation at the end of the sentence / passage. You need to include page numbers for all direct quotations. A useful reference, particularly with regard to referencing new electronic sources is at the following: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/subjects/reference/citation.php

7. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards

The assessment for this module consists of one element.

Element Type of

assessment Word or time limit Submission method

Final Submission

Date

010 Dissertation

MOD001170 60 credits: 15,000

words (MBA- PMP)

LSM Submission Website

http://www.lsmsubmissions.com

September 2015

Follow email corresponde

nce for deadlines and any possible

revisions.

Your dissertation must be written in English in typescript form on A4 paper. Your name must not appear on the dissertation. It is advisable to retain a copy for your own records. Please note submitted dissertations will only be returned in cases of failure. The maximum length of the dissertation depends on your chosen course, as shown below:

45 credits: 12,000 words (MOD001168) MA ((Top Up)

Note The maximum number of words does not include footnotes, the abstract, the bibliography, indented quotations, appendices and tables. All coursework assignments and other forms of assessment must be submitted by the published deadline which is detailed above. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted – ignorance of the deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non-submission. All student work which contributes to the eventual outcome of the module (ie: if it determines whether you will pass or fail the module and counts towards the mark you achieve for the module) is submitted

14

via the final submissions website using the formal submission sheet and via Turnitin®UK. Kindly note that the LS academic office CANNOT accept work directly from you. The cover sheet of the dissertation must include the following declaration: 'I declare that the above work is my own and that the material contained herein has not been substantially used in any other submission for an academic award'. The dissertation must be prefaced by an abstract. This is not an introduction but a summary which outlines the plan and argument of the dissertation. It should include brief details of the methodology employed. The abstract should not be longer than 300 words. It should be included immediately after the title page and it will be examined as part of the dissertation. A list of contents, such as the glossary, chapters, and appendices - with page references - should be included at the front of the dissertation. Pages should be numbered and double-line spacing used. Diagrams, figures, tables, and illustrations should be incorporated into the text at the appropriate place, unless there is a series of them or they are continually referred to throughout the text. In this case they should be placed in appendices at the end of the work. You are advised to use a drawing package for diagrams and scan in other illustrations.

The work of other authorities must be acknowledged. When quotations or general references are made they must be suitably referenced by using the Harvard system. Appendices should not contain material which is not used or referred to in the text. Similarly, illustrative material should not be included unless it is relevant, informative, and referred to in the text. A bibliography should be included at the end of the dissertation and should list, alphabetically, all the sources (including magazines and newspapers) that you have consulted. Books should be listed as: Author (surname then initials); title, edition, publisher, date. Other sources such as journals, magazines, and newspapers should be treated in a similar fashion. If sources are used which are not written in English then the English translation is required in the bibliography. You should also submit a copy of your dissertation on via Turnitin this will be used to help verify the sources you have used.

Presentation of your dissertation Your Dissertation should be presented as follows, ALL dissertations should include the following (but they may include more): A cover page with all required details (Student number, Module code, Assessmentg session) Disclaimer Page Abstract Set out on a page of its own immediately after the title page. The abstract is likely to be the last section to be written. It is a short (300 words maximum.) summary of the project (not an introduction) and should indicate the nature and scope of the work, outlining the research problem, key issues, findings and your conclusion/recommendations.

Table of Contents An outline of the whole project in list form, setting out the order of the sections, with page numbers. It is conventional to number the preliminary pages (abstract, table of contents) with lower case Roman numerals (i.e. (i), (ii), (iii) etc.) and the main text pages (starting with the first chapter) in Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, etc.) as shown below.

Contents Page List of Tables i List of Figures ii

15

List of Abbreviations iii Acknowledgements iv

Chapter 1 (Title) 1 (First Section heading) (Second etc.) (Third)

List of tables and figures You can present a list at the beginning of your dissertation/ project of the tables and figures you have included. A table is a presentation of data in tabular form; a figure is a diagrammatic representation of data or other material. Tables and figures should be clearly and consistently numbered, either above or below the table or figure. Each table and figure should have a separate heading (caption). The reader should be able to understand what the table or figure is about from this heading / caption without referring to the text for explanations. The numbers of the tables and the figures you use in the text and in the lists at the beginning should correspond exactly.

Main body of document, appropriately structured (this structure may vary depending on the nature of your dissertation.) Bibliography / References Appendices (these should only contain material which is genuinely supportive of the argument in the main body of the dissertation). Supervisor Contact Log (completed) (See Appendix 7) Do remember that clear writing makes a good impression. If your grammar is poor, sentence construction clumsy, and spelling bad, then your communication with the reader will also be affected. You will not be penalised for poor English unless it is so bad that the meaning of what you have written cannot be understood. You are required to use the following format:

Use A4 size paper only.

Type 1.5 or doublespaced. (You may want to use single spacing for indented quotes, footnote materials and the bibliography).

Use one side of paper only.

Margins should be approximately: o 3 cms on left hand side of page to allow for binding. o At least 1 cm on the right hand side o 3 cms top and bottom.

Pages should be numbered in a single sequence from the contents page onwards.

Short quotations can run in the text within single quotation marks (double quotation marks reserved for quotations within quotations). Quotations longer than about 30 words should be set in from the side of the page (normally the indent should be more than the paragraph indent).

Always write in complete sentences. Do not resort to note form.

Do not use abbreviations in the text unless they are for the organisations documents etc which are commonly initialised or referred to by acronyms eg. BBC

All abbreviations must be explained when they first appear and included in the front of the document following the contents page and the list of tables and figures.

Your documents must be bound using a plastic or metal comb binding. The cover should be plain except for the title and the author’s SID number. Reprographics will copy and bind your work. There is a charge for this service. Forms of Dissertation The final form your dissertation takes will depend on the topic and the approach you take for the presentation of the data. Two examples are: Example A

16

Chapter 1 - Introduction An explanation as to what the Dissertation is all about and why it is important. The research questions or hypotheses. Chapter 2 - Literature Review A critical analysis of what other researchers have said and where your topic fits in. The theoretical framework. Chapter 3 - Methodology Why certain data was collected and how it was collected and analysed. Chapter 4 - Results A presentation of your research results. Chapter 5 - Analysis and Discussion Analysis of your results showing the contribution to knowledge you have made and acknowledgement of any weaknesses/limitations in your work. Chapter 6 - Conclusions/Recommendations A description of the main lessons to be learned from the study and what future research could be carried out. Chapter 7 - References and Bibliography References are a detailed list of sources from which information has been obtained and which has been cited in the text. The bibliography is a detailed list of other sources you have used but not cited. Appendices - Detailed data referred to but not shown elsewhere. Example B You may wish to elect to write a descriptive type of dissertation that looks for patterns, ideas and hypotheses. If you do the quality of the dissertation will depend on:

How thoroughly the issues are covered.

How closely the facts relate to the original research question.

Whether the data collected provides valuable and new information that is a contribution to knowledge.

Whether the research could be built upon by future writers.

The extent to which creativity has been used in building the narrative. NB - This approach is not an extended essay, but evidence of critical reflection and analysis. The two forms of dissertation outlined above are given as an indication of possible formats. It is possible that your dissertation may require a different approach or modification to the above possibilities in presentation and content. Both presentation and content should be discussed with your Dissertation Supervisor at an early stage. Remember, study at Master's level encourages innovative application of research principles to academic work.

7.1 Submitting your work [Students in all other locations at Associate Colleges]

All student work which contributes to the eventual outcome of the module (i.e. if it determines whether you will pass or fail the module and counts towards the mark you achieve for the module) is submitted according to your institutions guidelines. Academic staff CANNOT accept work directly from you. Any late work will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question.

7.2 Feedback

You are entitled to feedback on your performance for all your assessed work. For all assessment tasks which are not examinations, this is accomplished by a member of academic staff providing your mark and associated comments which will relate to the achievement of the module’s intended learning outcomes and the assessment criteria you were given for the task when it was first issued. The marker of your assignment will include feedback on written assignments that includes answers to these three key questions:

1. What is your overall feedback? 2. How does your assignment compare to the marking criteria? 3. How can you improve in the future?

17

Examination scripts are retained by Anglia Ruskin and are not returned to students. However, you are entitled to feedback on your performance in an examination and may request a meeting with the Module Leader or Tutor to see your examination script and to discuss your performance. Anglia Ruskin is committed to providing you with feedback on all assessed work within 20 working days of the submission deadline or the date of an examination. This is extended to 30 days for feedback for a Major Project module (please note that working days excludes those days when Anglia Ruskin University is officially closed; e.g.: between Christmas and New Year). Personal tutors will offer to read feedback from several modules and help you to address any common themes that may be emerging. On occasion, you will receive feedback and marks for pieces of work that you completed in the earlier stages of the module. We provide you with this feedback as part of the learning experience and to help you prepare for other assessment tasks that you have still to complete. It is important to note that, in these cases, the marks for these pieces of work are unconfirmed. This means that, potentially, marks can change, in either direction! Marks for modules and individual pieces of work become confirmed on the Dates for the Official Publication of Results which can be checked at www.anglia.ac.uk/results.

7.3 Assessment Criteria

The criteria for assessing your dissertation are shown ON the Postgraduate Dissertation Assessment Criteria Form that is included as Appendix 6 in this document. They are: Introduction – Is the abstract adequate? Is there a clear purpose and rationale for the study? Clear set of objectives / research questions? Research Design & Methodology – Was research design and methodology discussed? Was the approach appropriate? Use of Literature / Sources – Was the range suitable and adequate? Has a critical review of the literature been adopted? Has the student made a ‘link’ between existing literature and their own research? Results, analysis and interpretation of data – Has the data been accurately presented and analysed or are the findings merely a description? Appropriate theory applied? Interpretation – Has the student made reasoned judgements on their findings? Conclusion & recommendations – Are conclusions reasoned? Do they correspond with the objective(s) of the dissertation? Has the student reflected on the extent they have achieved their objectives? Was limitations and future research discussed? Presentation - structure & language, Harvard Referencing correctly applied, appropriate use of tables/diagrams

7.4 Characteristics of a Postgraduate Dissertation

You will have gained some idea of what is required in a postgraduate dissertation from the learning outcomes of the module and from the assessment criteria above. In general terms we expect an emphasis on the critical literature review and an in-depth understanding of theory and methodology. Specifically, Methodology - you will be expected to critically review the theoretical, empirical, and methodology literature. The theory should be comprehensively discussed and understood, and paradigms of inquiry and different methodologies should be explored. You should show awareness of the soundness of the methodology you use and its rationale. Problem formulation - you will need to be precise and rigorous about the problem formulation and the setting of objectives. Relevance and originality in the choice of topic is also important. Content and Analysis - your dissertation should clearly meet stated objectives and indicate the extent that arguments are based on valid and reliable evidence, and identified and worked within a critically

18

analysed theoretical framework. Evaluation of Implications - the evaluation of the implications in the dissertation, based upon the analysis undertaken and upon any data collected, should be of high quality and aim for originality. Presentation - your dissertation should be well-structured in terms of both paragraphs and chapters. There should be attention to detail, expression should be clear, the title appropriate, and arguments coherent. Any appendices (and you are encouraged to keep these to a minimum) should be used. The same applies to references and the bibliography. Tables and diagrams should be of a high standard and make use of appropriate software.

19

8. How is My Work Marked?

After you have handed your dissertation, Anglia Ruskin undertakes a series of activities to assure that our marking processes are comparable with those employed at other universities in the UK and that your work has been marked fairly, honestly and consistently. These include:

Internally marked by 2 people - All dissertations or projects are marked independently by your supervisor and a second marker.

External moderation – A sample of student work for all modules is moderated by external examiners – experienced academic staff from other universities (and sometimes practitioners who represent relevant professions) - who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback, advice and assurance that the marking of your work is comparable to that in other UK universities. Many of Anglia Ruskin’s staff act as external examiners at other universities.

Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) – Performance by all students on all modules is discussed and approved at the appropriate DAPs which are attended by all relevant Module Leaders and external examiners. Anglia Ruskin has over 25 DAPs to cover all the different subjects we teach.

This module falls within the remit of the Leadership and Management DAP. The following external examiners are appointed to this DAP and will oversee the assessment of this and other modules within the DAP’s remit: Leadership and Management External examiners

External Examiner’s Name Academic Institution Position or Employer

Colin Allen University of Greenwich Director of Student Experience

Janet Astley York St John University Senior Lecturer in HRM

Brian Kriefman Regent’s College London Head of Department, Accounting, Finance & Economics

Prof Phil Megicks Plymouth Business School

Professor of Marketing and Strategy Executive Head of School of Management/Associate Dean Research

Chris Miller University of South Wales Principal Lecturer

The above list is correct at the time of publication. However, external examiners are appointed at various points throughout the year. An up-to-date list of external examiners is available to students and staff at www.anglia.ac.uk/eeinfo. Dissertations are graded using the criteria set out on the dissertation assessment form (See Appendix 6). A Viva may be held if examiners feel unable to reach a final decision on a mark, based on the written work submitted. A Viva may also be held if a student is suspected of plagiarism.

20

Anglia Ruskin’s Dissertation marking process is represented in the flowchart below:

Student submits work / sits

examination

Work collated and passed to Dissertation Supervisors and

second markers1

Work is marked by Dissertation Supervisor and second marker. Marks are subsequently agreed2

Internal moderation samples selected. Moderation undertaken

by a third academic3

Unconfirmed marks and feedback to students within 20 working

days (30 working days for Major Projects)

External moderation samples selected and moderated by

External Examiners4

Marks submitted to DAP5 for consideration and approval

Marks Approved by DAP5 and forwarded to Awards Board

Any issues?

Any issues?

Students receive initial (unconfirmed)

feedback

Confirmed marks issued to students

via e-Vision

Ma

rkin

g S

tage

Inte

rnal M

odera

tion S

tage

E

xte

rna

l M

od

era

tio

n S

tag

e

DA

P4 S

tage

YES

YES

NO

NO

Flowchart of Anglia Ruskin’s Marking Processes

1 All work is marked anonymously or double marked where identity of the student is known (e.g.: in a presentation) 2 The internal (and external) moderation process compares work from all locations where the module is delivered

(e.g.: Cambridge, Chelmsford, Peterborough, Malaysia, India, Trinidad etc.) 3 The sample for the internal moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever

is the greater) for each marker and covers the full range of marks 4 Only modules at levels 5, 6 and 7 are subject to external moderation (unless required for separate reasons). The

sample for the external moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for the entire module and covers the full range of marks

5 DAP: Departmental Assessment Panel – Anglia Ruskin has over 25 different DAPs to reflect our subject coverage

21

8.1 Re-Assessment (resit)

Whilst we hope that all our students are successful in all the assessment tasks they complete, on occasion some students fail their dissertation and are therefore given one opportunity to resit the assessment. In these circumstances, the e-Vision system will tell you if you have failed and what it is you have to do to retrieve that failure, e.g. a resit examination, write a new piece of coursework, etc. The e-Vision system will also tell you when this has to be completed. It is your responsibility to make sure you are aware of any resit requirements, the exact details of the reassessment and when it will take place, e.g. the submission deadline or the period for any examination. Please note that the overall mark for any module which you pass after you have been reassessed, e.g. undertaken a resit examination, will be capped at 40%.

9. Assessment Offences

You are reminded that any work that you submit must be your own. All suspected assessment offences will be investigated and can result in severe penalties. Please note that it is your responsibility to consult the relevant sections of the Academic Regulations (section 10 – see www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs) and the Student Handbook. When you are preparing your work for submission, it is important that you understand the various academic conventions that you are expected to follow in order to make sure that you do not leave yourself open to accusations of plagiarism (eg: the correct use of referencing, citations, footnotes etc.) and that your work maintains its academic integrity. Plagiarism is theft and constitutes the presentation of another’s work as your own in order to gain an unfair advantage. You will receive advice and guidance on how to avoid plagiarism and other elements of poor academic practice during the early stages of your studies at Anglia Ruskin. Guidance on being honest in your work Introduction Being honest in your work is at the heart of studying and working at university. To be honest in your work you must acknowledge the ideas and work of others you use, and you must not try to get an advantage over others by being dishonest. It is important that you understand what it means to be honest in your work. Although there is general agreement within the UK academic community about the types of activity that are unacceptable, this does vary slightly between institutions, and may be different from where you studied before. We have developed this guidance to help you understand what it means to be honest in your work, and what you should do to make sure that you are handing in work that meets our expectations. This means we can make sure that we can maintain reliable standards for our academic awards, and students continue to enjoy studying for academic qualifications that have a good reputation. In this guidance we will:

clearly define what being honest in your work and good practice mean, and how you can achieve this;

define ‘assessment offences’, including plagiarism, cheating and collusion;

identify the resources, help and advice available to help you learn the academic skills you need to avoid committing assessment offences;

explain how we expect you to behave; and

describe what happens if we think you have committed an assessment offence. Being honest in your work and good practice You can show good practice when you do your work independently, honestly and in a proper academic style, using good referencing and acknowledging all of your sources. To show good academic practice you must:

22

show you understand the literature;

use research from academics and others in your area of study;

discuss and evaluate ideas and theories;

develop your own independent evaluation of academic issues; and

develop your own arguments. To support your own good practice you will need to develop your:

skills at studying and getting information (for example, reading, taking notes, research and so on);

skills in looking at an argument and making your own evaluation (for example, having a balanced opinion, using reasoning and argument);

writing skills for essays, reports, dissertations and so on;

referencing skills (how you include your sources of information in your work); and

exam techniques (for example, revising and timing). Achieving good practice is not as complicated as it may appear. You need to do the following.

Know the rules.

Make sure you reference all of your information sources. Poor practice or dishonesty in your work (such as plagiarism, cheating, fraud and so on) can be a result of you not knowing what you are allowed to do.

Develop your own style. Sometimes students include too much original text from the work of others, as they believe that they cannot ‘put it any better’. Although you should try to express ideas in your own words, quoting or summing up ideas from academic sources is fine, as long as you say where you have taken this from. You must also reference other people’s performances or art in your own work. It fine to use other people’s performances and art, but you must be completely clear about why you are using that work, and make sure it is obvious that it isn’t your own.

Definitions of assessment offences Plagiarism Plagiarism is when you present someone else’s work, words, images, ideas, opinions or discoveries, whether published or not, as your own. It is also when you take the artwork, images or computer-generated work of others, without properly acknowledging where this is from or you do this without their permission. You can commit plagiarism in examinations, but is most likely to happen in coursework, assignments, portfolios, essays, dissertations and so on. Examples of plagiarism include:

directly copying from written work, physical work, performances, recorded work or images, without saying where this is from;

using information from the internet or electronic media (such as DVDs and CDs) which belongs to someone else, and presenting it as your own;

rewording someone else’s work, without referencing them; and

handing in something for assessment which has been produced by another student or person. It is important that you do not plagiarise – intentionally or unintentionally – because the work of others and their ideas are their own. There are benefits to producing original ideas in terms of awards, prizes, qualifications, reputation and so on. To use someone else’s work, words, images, ideas or discoveries is a form of theft. Collusion Collusion is similar to plagiarism as it is an attempt to present another’s work as your own. In plagiarism the original owner of the work is not aware you are using it, in collusion two or more people may be involved in trying to produce one piece of work to benefit one individual, or plagiarising another person’s work.

23

Examples of collusion include:

agreeing with others to cheat;

getting someone else to produce part or all of your work;

copying the work of another person (with their permission);

submitting work from essay banks;

paying someone to produce work for you; and

allowing another student to copy your own work. Many parts of university life need students to work together. Working as a team, as directed by your tutor, and producing group work is not collusion. Collusion only happens if you produce joint work to benefit of one or more person and try to deceive another (for example the assessor). Cheating Cheating is when someone aims to get unfair advantage over others. Examples of cheating include:

taking unauthorised material into the examination room;

inventing results (including experiments, research, interviews and observations);

handing your own previously graded work back in;

getting an examination paper before it is released;

behaving in a way that means other students perform poorly;

pretending to be another student; and

trying to bribe members of staff or examiners. How to check your plagiarism via Turnitin

You are required to submit your written assignments online via Turnitin. You must put YOUR Student ID number (SID) as the submission title (details below).

You will be enrolled automatically to a Turnitin class: The Originality Report Class to which you can submit multiple drafts for originality checking. You should follow the detailed instructions provided on the Learning Portal.

When you submit your paper, remember to:

Plagiarism Requirement

a) Keep Default

b) Enter your first and last name(s)

c) Enter your SID as the submission title:

VERY IMPORTANT!

SID

d) Browse to search for your assignment file

f) or cancel

e) Upload

24

Click on the view button

Prior to dispatching the dissertation to the External Examiner, the dissertation must be submitted to the electronic plagiarism checking software (i.e. Turnitin);

Turnitin.com uses the Originality Check tool to compile the Originality Report, which contains detailed information about the number and the use of each primary source in the submitted document. This is done through the Similarity Index, which is a percentage of words in the paper that match all the primary sources to all words in the document.

The Similarity Index also shows a copy of the student paper with primary sources. Each primary source is given a colour and number. The text within the student’s paper, which corresponds to a primary source, will be highlighted in that respective colour and attached with its respective number. The percentage of each primary source refers to a percentage of words in the entire paper that match the source. Papers considered plagiarised have a percentage on at least one primary source greater than 5 %.

If the Turnitin score is greater than the prescribed levels, the Program Committee must address them

using the Turnitin detailed report.

HOW TO VIEW YOUR FEEDBACK

Click on the class that you wish to view and then you will see the assignments for the module listed.

Click the blue view button to open up the document viewer. A new window will open and you will see

your feedback on the right-hand side of the screen.

POINTS TO NOTE

1. All work submitted MUST be entitled by your Student ID number.

2. The Originality Report is automatically generated by Turnitin on submitting work. A paper copy of the originality report is not required.

3. The Originality Report will not be used to make assessment decisions unless concerns arise as to poor academic practice, plagiarism, or collusion. The report may then be considered as part of the normal investigatory procedures undertaken by the academic team and the Director of Studies (again, please see Section 10 of the Assessment Regulations).

4. Re-sits and extensions are also to be submitted via Turnitin. New Turnitin classes will be created for re-sits.

5. Full details as on submitting to Turnitin, the Originality Report, and a FAQs list, can be located on the module VLE.

25

All coursework assignments and other forms of assessment must be submitted by the published

deadline. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted – ignorance of the

deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non- submission.

Collusion Collusion is similar to plagiarism as it is an attempt to present another’s work as your own. In plagiarism the original owner of the work is not aware you are using it, in collusion two or more people may be involved in trying to produce one piece of work to benefit one individual, or plagiarising another person’s work. Examples of collusion include:

agreeing with others to cheat;

getting someone else to produce part or all of your work;

copying the work of another person (with their permission);

submitting work from essay banks;

paying someone to produce work for you; and

allowing another student to copy your own work. Many parts of university life need students to work together. Working as a team, as directed by your tutor, and producing group work is not collusion. Collusion only happens if you produce joint work to benefit of one or more person and try to deceive another (for example the assessor). Cheating Cheating is when someone aims to get unfair advantage over others. Examples of cheating include:

taking unauthorised material into the examination room;

inventing results (including experiments, research, interviews and observations);

handing your own previously graded work back in;

getting an examination paper before it is released;

behaving in a way that means other students perform poorly;

pretending to be another student; and

trying to bribe members of staff or examiners. Help to avoid assessment offences Most of our students are honest and want to avoid making assessment offences. We have a variety of resources, advice and guidance available to help make sure you can develop good academic skills. We will make sure that we make available consistent statements about what we expect in this document, and in student handbooks and module guides. You will be able to do tutorials on being honest in your work from the library and other central support services and faculties, and you will be able to test your written work for plagiarism using ‘Turnitin®UK’ (a software package that detects plagiarism). You can get advice on how to honestly use the work of others in your own work from the library website (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) and your lecturer and personal tutor. You will have an opportunity to do a ‘formative’ assignment before you finish and hand in your first ‘summative’ assignment. A ‘formative’ assignment is one in which you can talk about your work thoroughly with your tutor to make sure that you are working at the correct level for your award, and that you understand what is meant by good practice (a ‘summative’ assignment counts towards the assessment for your course). You will be able to use ‘Turnitin®UK’, a special software package which is used to detect plagiarism. Turnitin®UK will produce a report which clearly shows if passages in your work have been taken from somewhere else. You may talk about this with your personal tutor to see where you may need to improve your academic practice. We will not see these formative Turnitin®UK reports as assessment offences.

26

If you are not sure whether the way you are working meets our requirements, you should talk to your personal tutor. They will be able to help you and tell you about other resources which will help you develop your academic skills. What we expect from you

We will make sure you have the chance to practice your academic skills and avoid accidentally breaking our Academic Regulations. On page nine of the Student Charter (see http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/09_student_charter.pdf), it says you have to ‘be aware of the academic rules relating to your studies’. To make sure that you are aware of the rules, we expect you to agree to:

read this guidance and make sure you thoroughly understand it;

work through ‘PILOT’, the online tutorial available on our library website (http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/pilot/), which aims to help you learn good practice and has a useful section on plagiarism;

make sure that you are familiar with how to reference (acknowledge other people’s work);

correctly reference all the sources for the information you have included in your work;

identify information you have downloaded from the internet;

never use someone else’s ideas for a performance, film or TV programme, their artwork, graphics (including graphs, spreadsheets and so on and information from the internet) as if they are yours;

only hand in your own original work;

never use another person’s work as if it were your own; and

never let other students use or copy your work. What we will do for you To help you avoid making assessment offences, our staff will:

make sure they are familiar with the guidance on being honest in your work and the Academic Regulations;

tell you clearly about the guidance on being honest in your work and any guidelines on misconduct, and record the dates for future reference;

arrange library information sessions for you;

promote the resources on the library website and put links to them in module guides and student handbooks;

include statements on academic honesty in each module guide, making sure they are consistent throughout our university;

make you aware of the punishments for misconduct early in the course;

give you effective guidance on how you should acknowledge the information you have used;

tell you, in writing if possible, how far you may work with other students in your coursework;

plan procedures for assessing work in a way that reduces plagiarism, cheating and collusion;

be aware that you may have worked differently in the past and make sure that you are aware of good practice in the UK;

familiarise themselves with ‘Turnitin®UK’ and its reports; and

report all suspected misconduct using the proper disciplinary procedures. Procedures for assessment offences An assessment offence is the general term used to define cases where a student has tried to get unfair academic advantage in an assessment for themselves or another student. We will aim to give you as much help as possible to avoid an assessment offence. We listed a number of possible assessment offences earlier in the document. These and any relevant breaks of the Academic Regulations are dishonest, unacceptable and not allowed. We will fully investigate all cases of suspected assessment offences. If we prove that you have committed an assessment offence, we will take action against you using our disciplinary procedures.

27

For full details of what punishments you may receive for assessment offences, see the Academic Regulations, section 10 at: www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs And finally One of the main aims of university is to give you the ability to learn, have independent judgment, academic rigour and intellectual honesty. You should encourage people to ask questions, to show personal and professional honesty, and have mutual respect. You, university teachers and support staff are responsible for working together to achieve this aim. References Adapted from Scott, M, (2000), Academic Misconduct Policy. A model for the FE Sector. (Copyright _ Association of Colleges 2000) More information Academic Regulations, section 10 (www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs) PILOT, the online tutorial in academic practice (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/pilot/ ) Referencing procedures (http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) RefWorks, a bibliographic management service that allows you to create a personal database and collect bibliographies in a variety of styles (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/refworks.htm) The Student Charter (http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/09_student_charter.pdf)

10. Responsibilities of the Student

It is your responsibility to prepare and present your dissertation by the deadline given. Failure to submit by that date will result in the dissertation being assessed as a FAIL. There will be NO EXTENSIONS allowed except in highly exceptional circumstances agreed by the Student Adviser. You should also be aware that you are responsible for:

Submitting an initial synopsis (outline of your topic and title) by the specified date.

Submitting a proposed timetable of work and research by the specified date.

Building a substantial contingency into your timetable to allow for unforeseen and unexpected problems.

Undertaking the necessary research.

Ensuring that your Supervisor is kept informed of your progress.

Ensuring that all progress reports, drafts etc are submitted to your Supervisor by the specified date.

Arranging for the dissertation to be presented according to the guidelines given in this guide.

11. Security

As your work for the dissertation is of great importance, you should keep copies of all relevant material to guard against loss. It is advisable to have back-up copies of any disks on which you have stored information.

28

12. Learning Resources

Recommended Reading:

Saunders, M, Lewis, P and Thornhill, A; (2012), ‘Research Methods for Business Students’, 6th edn. Pearson (NB: You must log into the ARU website in order to obtain access to the book – Direct link: - http://primo.anglia.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?cs=frb&ct=frb&frbg=1608356&fctN=facet_frbrgroupid&fctV=1608356&doc=dedupmrg1679585&lastPag=&lastPagIndx=1&rfnGrp=frbr&frbrSrt=date&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A(APU_ML_DS)%2Cscope%3A(APU_SFX_DS)%2Cscope%3A(APU_LMS_DS_MAIN)%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe%2CEbscoLocalSet1%2CEbscoLocalSet2&frbg=&tab=local&dstmp=1407332200878&srt=rank&ct=search&mode=Basic&&dum=true&indx=1&vl(freeText0)=Business%20Research%20saunders&fn=search&vid=ANG_VU1)

Bell, J. (2010), ‘Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science’, Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill. (Direct link: http://primo.anglia.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?fn=search&ct=search&initialSearch=true&mode=Basic&tab=local&indx=1&dum=true&srt=rank&vid=ANG_VU1&frbg=1608356&fctN=facet_frbrgroupid&fctV=1608356&vl%28freeText0%29=doing+your+research+project&scp.scps=scope%3A%28APU_ML_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%28APU_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%28APU_LMS_DS_MAIN%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe%2CEbscoLocalSet1%2CEbscoLocalSet2)

Denscombe, M (2012), Research Proposals: A Practical Guide, McGraw-Hill (Direct link: http://primo.anglia.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?cs=frb&ct=frb&frbg=18855699&fctN=facet_frbrgroupid&fctV=18855699&doc=APU_LMS_DS000734454&lastPag=&lastPagIndx=11&rfnGrp=frbr&frbrSrt=date&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A(APU_ML_DS)%2Cscope%3A(APU_SFX_DS)%2Cscope%3A(APU_LMS_DS_MAIN)%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe%2CEbscoLocalSet1%2CEbscoLocalSet2&frbg=&tab=local&dstmp=1407332633396&srt=rank&ct=search&mode=Basic&&dum=true&indx=1&vl(freeText0)=denscombe&fn=search&vid=ANG_VU1)

Denscombe, M (2002), Ground Rules for Good Research: A 10 point Guide for Social Research, Open University (Direct Link: http://primo.anglia.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?fn=search&ct=search&initialSearch=true&mode=Basic&tab=local&indx=1&dum=true&srt=rank&vid=ANG_VU1&frbg=&vl%28freeText0%29=Ground+rules+for+good+research&scp.scps=scope%3A%28APU_ML_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%28APU_SFX_DS%29%2Cscope%3A%28APU_LMS_DS_MAIN%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe%2CEbscoLocalSet1%2CEbscoLocalSet2)

Wilson, J. (2010), ‘Essentials of business research: a guide to doing your research project, London: Sage Publications.

Recommended Internet Resources Your supervisor may be able to recommend internet resources of particular relevance to your area of research. Other Resources Use of a copyright library (letters will be provided by the Project supervisor to enable students to access a copyright library). Anglia Ruskin Digital Library: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/diglib.htm

Link to the University Library catalogue and Digital Library http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/ Link to Harvard Referencing guide http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/harvard.htm

Faculty Liaison Librarians LAIBS Deborah Stebbings (deborah.stebbings@anglia.ac.uk) extn 2470 Specialist Learning Resources None.

29

APPENDIX 1: DISSERTATION PROPOSAL COVERSHEET

Student Name: Student Number:

Degree Programme:

Dissertation to be submitted:

Area of Dissertation: This must be a minimum of 2-3 paragraphs and include an overview of the research topic, along with aims and objectives. An additional page can be attached if required. Please tick the most appropriate subject area for your Dissertation

Accounting and Finance Business Decision Making

Business Economics Corporate Strategy

Organisational Behaviour Marketing

HRM Information Technology

Enterprise and Innovation Logistics/Supply Chain

Signature of Student: Date:

Office Use Only

Proposed Dissertation Supervisor:

30

APPENDIX 2: PRODUCING AND SUBMITTING YOUR DISSERTATION PROPOSAL

You are required to produce a 500 word – course work A for your RMBM module and the Dissertation Research Proposal (Course work B- RMBM) consists of approximately 2500 words. This should be based on your chosen dissertation topic. A guide to the structure of the proposal is set out in (Appendix 3), followed by an example of a Dissertation Research Proposal (Appendix 4). Although this example is slightly longer than what we are expecting from you, it still contains all of the ‘key elements’ typically found in a research proposal. It’s important to follow this structure as it makes it easier for us when it comes to allocating your Dissertation Supervisor.

31

APPENDIX 3: HOW TO STRUCTURE YOUR DISSERTATION PROPOSAL

Title The title of your proposed research must fulfil a number of set criteria. First, it must reflect the nature of your study. For example, if you intend studying a particularly firm’s financial performance, then something to this effect must be stressed in your proposed title. Second, it must be concise. Ideally, try not to exceed more than 10-12 words. Third, try to avoid unnecessary terms such as ‘Case study approach’. Finally, try and keep your title clear and easy to understand. In other words, consider it from the layperson’s point of view. Research Problem The research problem or the main focus of your research should be clearly set out within the introductory section of your proposal. As noted earlier, it is important that the nature of your topic is clear and easy to understand. Your introductory section should provide background to your study; while at the same time define any key words or terms. Ideally, brief reference should also be made to existing studies that are relevant to your own work. Of course, making sure that the Harvard referencing System is applied in the correct way. Key Literature This involves a shortened literature review that critically analyses the work by leading authors relevant to your own research issue. In short, it must be critical and not overly descriptive. The verbatim copying of previous studies also provides no evidence as to how existing work ‘links’ to your own study. Remember that at some point you also need to say how your own research fits in to the gap of current literature. This usually comes somewhere towards the end of your preliminary review. Methodology This part of the proposal should classify your research design; include your rationale behind your chosen research strategy, along with methods for collecting and analyzing your data. This is of course dependent on your research approach. Aim to provide support for your choice of methodology. This can be done on the basis of using academic references or referring to previous work that also used a methodology similar to your own. Clear support for the latter option is the ability to compare your findings with that of previous studies. The importance of validity and reliability is something that one would also expect to see featured in this part of your proposal. In addition, use this as an opportunity to cite any potential limitations that you foresee with your research. Limitations are constraints in your research. For example, for most researchers financial and time constraints are potential limitations. Research Timetable

32

Unlike your final research project, your proposal will not set out your research findings and conclusions. This part of the proposal is intended for you to develop your own research timetable. You might question the purpose of a timetable, as you prefer to work in an ad hoc manner. True, every researcher works in their ‘own’ way. However, the setting out of clear tasks, along with start and completion dates can help you to work towards a set research schedule. A Gantt chart often works best. This can set out the tasks e.g. literature review, data collection; writing up etc, along with a respective start date and completion date. A point worth mentioning is that when allocating time, it is better to be conservative, rather than too ambitious.

33

APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Title: The Internationalization and Brand Development of Chinese Firms Research Problem A number of internal and external factors have resulted in many Chinese firms becoming involved in the internationalization process. Increased domestic competition, along with an easing of regulations under WTO, has allowed Chinese firms to penetrate international markets. This has resulted in a dramatic increase in Chinese outward investment. However, there currently exists a limited amount of research on the internationalization of Chinese firms (Child and Rodrigues, 2005; Deng, 2007a; Deng, 2007b). The majority of research focuses on inward, as opposed to outward Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Therefore, a gap needs to be filled that explores the reasons Chinese firms internationalize, as well as how they currently penetrate international markets.

An important aspect of internationalization is how an organization develops its brand when penetrating international markets. For example, a key question is to what extent should we adapt our brand attributes? Often viewed as ‘the workshop of the world’, China has yet to develop a single brand that can be described as truly global. Building brands fits with the Chinese government’s strategy of consolidating strategic industries in order to create national champions that can hold their own in global markets and is viewed as one more way for the country to restore its imperial glory (Shenkar, 2003: 158).

Reasons for China developing global brands is that the home market is fiendishly competitive and puts constant pressure on prices, branded products can be more profitable than those of OEMs, and competing in foreign markets forces companies to innovate and improve, thus helping them to move away from their image as producers of cheap goods (Gao et al., 2003).

According to one of the world’s leading brand consultants – Interbrand, Chinese enterprises such as Haier, Lenovo, TCL and Huawei Technologies are ready to compete on a world stage. Although Chinese brands have made evident and impressive progress in terms of internationalization, they still have far to go to compete with their global rivals, and the gaps are even widening in some respects. This is demonstrated by the revenue of China’s largest consumer appliance company, Haier, which in 2002 amounted to only about ten per cent of Sony’s total electronic sales (Fan, 2006: 367).

Interestingly, the current 2007 list of Interbrand’s top twenty-five Chinese brands includes a total of seven that feature ‘China’ in their name. Much research has shown that country-of-origin (COO) affects consumers’ perceptions of brand image and consumer behaviour (Hong and Wyer, 1995; Peterson and Jolibert, 1995). Chinese products are typically perceived as being ‘cheap’, and of ‘low quality’. Therefore, one would postulate that in order to establish a global brand, reference to China might not help with global ambitions. Even China’s East Asian neighbours have brands featured in the top 100. Japan has eight brands listed (positions in brackets), Toyota (6); Honda (19); Sony (25); Canon (36); Nintendo (44); Panasonic (78); Lexus (92) and Nissan (98), while The Republic of Korea has three brands listed – Samsung (21); Hyundai (72) and LG (97). These Japanese and South Korean companies made the transition from national to global brands; however, this took some years to achieve.

The development of Chinese brands has received limited attention from researchers (Fan, 2006). Therefore, a gap in the literature exists to explore reasons behind a lack of truly global Chinese brands, and determine the steps Chinese firms need to take in order to achieve truly global brand status. In sum, the nature of this research project is to examine the internationalization and brand development of Chinese firms. As reflected in the title, a case study approach will be adopted. In other

34

words, analysis will be based on the existing internationalization activities of Chinese firms. Research Objective / Questions The main objective of the proposed research is - to better understand the internationalization and brand development of Chinese firms. The aim is to not only evaluate internationalization and the reasons China lacks a truly global brand, but also analyze what types of strategies Chinese brands need to take in order to achieve ‘global brand’ status. The objectives for this study are as follows:

Understand what motivates Chinese firms to internationalize.

Examine the internationalization strategies adopted by Chinese firms.

Determine the reasons behind China’s lack of truly global brands.

Examine the strategies Chinese firms need to adopt in order to develop global brands.

The main research questions to be addressed are:

Why do Chinese firms decide to internationalize?

What are the internationalization strategies adopted by Chinese firms?

Why doesn’t China currently have a major global brand?

What strategies do Chinese brands need to adopt in order to achieve global brand status?

How can Chinese firms compete in global markets?

Key Literature There has been a call from a number of researchers to examine the internationalization of emerging market multinationals (EMM), especially those originating from China (See Fan, 2008: 357). Research into FDI in China is now a ‘well trodden path’. However, there exists a limited body of literature into China’s outward investment. Particularly in relation to the internationalization process of Chinese firms. Child and Rodrigues’ (2005) article is one of the few studies that explore internationalization from a Chinese perspective. Obviously the growing dominance of China on the global stage is justification for a better understanding of the internationalisation of Chinese firms. Although there have recently been a number of high profile cases e.g. Lenovo’s acquisition of IBM’s PC division, the actual process of internationalization of Chinese firms, and reasons behind it, have still not been fully explored.

According to Hulland (1999) the source country of brands can be seen as an important determinant of brand choice. Given China’s reputation as the ‘workshop of the world’ it is difficult to find anything these days that is not produced in China. Although many of the world’s top global brands such as Nike, Nokia and Gap are produced in China and other developing countries, consumers often view these brands based on the origin of the brand, as opposed to the country of manufacture. Recently the ‘made in China’ label has proven somewhat of a headache for marketers of Chinese brands. An article in Business Week (September 24th, 2007) highlights this by stressing that “after a year of massive toy recalls tainted toothpaste scares, and poisonous pet food incidents, consumers around the globe are thinking twice—or more—before buying Chinese-made goods. Indeed, in a new survey of marketing and business professionals worldwide, 69% of respondents said the phrase ‘Made in China’ hurts mainland brands. The word most frequently associated with Chinese products? ‘Cheap.’

Methodology

35

This study will use a range of secondary sources. For this study, this includes annual reports, promotional material, company documentation, published case descriptions, magazine and newspaper reports, as well as government printed sources. Multiple sources of data are used in case studies to increase validity and reliability (Yin, 1989). It should be stressed that the secondary data in this research is largely limited to data presented in English. As a non-Chinese speaker, this is an obvious limitation since it is restricting the volume of data available for analysis. However, it is a common problem for individual researchers conducting cross-cultural research. This study follows a qualitative approach by principally analysing relatively qualitative information and is based on comparisons between cases. Its intention is exploratory in nature, aimed at advancing tentative propositions rather than drawing generalized inferences (Child and Yan, 2003).

Research Timetable It is envisaged that this entire research project will be completed within a period of 18 – 24 months. At first, this may seem like an extremely short period of time to complete such an in-depth study, however, it must be noted that the student has already collected a significant amount of secondary data on the subject. In addition, the student has close contacts in a UK-Sino joint venture therefore has an excellent insight into the logistics of operating such a venture. In addition, he is very much familiar with existing relevant sources and has access to data. References Child, J. and Rodrigues, S.B. (2005) ‘The internationalization of Chinese firms: A case for theoretical extension’, Management & Organisation Review, 1 (3): 381-410. Child, J. and Yan, Y. (2003) ‘National and transitional effects in international joint ventures: Indications from Sino-foreign joint ventures’ Management International Review, 41 (1): 53-75. Fan, Y. (2006) ‘The globalisation of Chinese brands’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24 (4): 365-379. Fan, Y. (2008) ‘The rise of emerging multinationals and the impact on marketing’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26 (4): Viewpoint. Gao, P., Woetzel, J.R., and Wu, Y. (2003) ‘Can Chinese brands make it abroad?’ The Mckinsey Quarterly, Special Edition: Global directions. Hong, S. and Wyer, R.S. (1995) ‘Effects of Country-of-origin and Product attribute information on product evaluation: An information processing perspective’, Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (2): 175-187. Hulland, J. (1999) ‘The effect of country-of-brand and brand name on product evaluation and consideration: a cross-country comparison’, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 11 (1): 23-40. Interbrand (2007) ‘Made in China: 2007 Brand Survey’, online source: www.ourfishbowl.com/images/surveys/Interbrand_Made_In_China_2007.pdf, accessed 10 July 2008. Kwok, S., Uncles, M., Huang, Y. (2006) ‘Brand Preferences and brand choices among urban Chinese consumers: An investigation of COO effects’, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Logistics, 18 (3).

36

Peterson, R.A. and Jolibert, A.J.P. (1995) ‘A meta-analysis country-of-origin effects’, Journal of International Business Studies, 26 (4): 883-901. Ping, Deng (2007a) ‘Investing for Strategic Resources and its rationale: The case of outward FDI from Chinese Companies’, Business Horizons, 50 (1): 71-81. Ping, Deng (2007b) ‘Outward investment by Chinese MNCs: Motivations and Implications’, Business Horizons, 47 (3): 8-16. Shenkar, Oded (2006) The Chinese Century. New Jersey: Wharton School Publishing. Yin, R.K. (1989) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

37

APPENDIX 5: ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND

MARKING STANDARDS - LEVEL 7

Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students’ expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is worthy of publication or public performance or display.

Mark Bands Outcome

Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2)

Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills

Ch

ara

cte

risti

cs o

f S

tud

en

t A

ch

iev

em

en

t b

y M

ark

ing

Ban

d

90-100%

Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level

Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with very clear originality and autonomy. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument making an exceptional use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency. Work

pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication

Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Exceptional research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive/professional skills, and

substantial creativity and originality. Exceptional academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication

80-89%

Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with clear originality and autonomy. Outstanding development of conceptual structures and argument making an exemplary use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Very high level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Outstanding research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, outstanding expressive/professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Exemplary academic/intellectual skills

70-79%

Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument making excellent use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. High level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, excellent expressive/ professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills, and considerable creativity and originality

60-69% Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions

Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions

50-59%

Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions

Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions

40-49%

A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level

Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent

Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent.

30-39%

A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensation. Satisfies qualifying mark

Limited knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and limited argument. Limited use of scholarly conventions.

Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/ Professional skills not yet secure. Weak academic/ intellectual skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions

20-29%

Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not

satisfied. No compensation available

Little evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with little synthesis of existing scholarship and little evidence of argument. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions.

Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/ accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills virtually absent. Very weak academic/intellectual skills. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions

10-19%

Inadequate knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Wholly descriptive, with inadequate synthesis of existing scholarship and inadequate argument. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions.

Inadequate use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills absent. Extremely weak academic/intellectual skills. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions

1-9%

No evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Incoherent and completely but poorly descriptive, with no evidence of synthesis of existing scholarship and no argument whatsoever. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions.

No evidence of use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Incoherent structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills non-existent. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions

0% Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to

address the assignment brief (e.g.: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes

38

APPENDIX 6: LAIBS POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION ASSESSMENT FORM

Student Number:

Dissertation Title:

First Marker: Suggested Mark: % Agreed Mark:

Second Marker: Suggested Mark: % %

Marking Criteria Comments Mark % Weight Weighted

Mark Introduction Is the abstract adequate? Is there a clear purpose and rationale for the study? Clear set of objectives / research questions?

0.1

Research Design & Methodology Was research design and methodology discussed? Was the approach appropriate?

0.2

Use of Literature / Sources Was the range suitable and adequate? Has a critical review of the literature been adopted? Has the student made a ‘link’ between existing literature and their own research?

0.2

Results, analysis and interpretation of data Has the data been accurately presented and analysed or are the findings merely a description? Appropriate theory applied? Interpretation – Has the student made reasoned judgments on their findings?

0.3

Conclusion & recommendations Are conclusions reasoned? Do they correspond with the objective(s) of the dissertation? Has the student reflected on the extent they have achieved their objectives? Limitations and future research discussed?

0.1

Presentation Structure & language, Harvard Referencing correctly applied, appropriate use of tables/diagrams?

0.1

TOTAL:

Marks under each heading should be given careful consideration. If the default weight is inappropriate please indicate a new weight and explain this in your report overleaf (e.g. a work based project might involve less attention being paid to literature review).

39

APPENDIX 7: LAIBS SUPERVISOR CONTACT LOG

SUPERVISOR CONTACT LOG

(TO BE SUBMITTED WITH DISSERTATION)

Student Number:

Degree Programme:

Proposed Dissertation Title (as submitted to Faculty Office):

Agreed Title (as agreed with supervisor):

Supervisor’s Signature: Date:

Date and time of meeting

Notes Supervisor’s initials

This form is to be submitted for signature by your supervisor on every occasion that you consult him or her regarding your dissertation. The completed log must be submitted with your dissertation.

40

Supervisor Change Sheet (SCS) Form

UGMP and PGMP (only)

Student Name:

Student ID Number:

Email Address:

Course:

Proposed Dissertation Title:

Subject Area:

Current supervisor:

Desired Supervisor:

Reason for the supervisor change request (please provide details and evidence):

Signature: Date

For Office Use only:

Decision: Yes No

If yes, please write below the name of the new supervisor and provide reasons.

If no, please provide reasons.

Name of staff member

Signature Date

41

APPENDIX 8: RESEARCH ETHICS APPLICATION FORM (STAGE 1)

More information on ethics procedures can be found on your faculty website. You must read the Question Specific Advice for Stage 1 Research Ethics Approval form. All research carried out by students and staff at Anglia Ruskin University and all students at our Franchise Associate Colleges, must comply with Anglia Ruskin University’s Research Ethics Policy (students at other types of Associate College need to check requirements). There is no distinction between undergraduate, taught masters, research degree students and staff research. All research projects, including pilot studies, must receive research ethical approval prior to approaching participants and/or commencing data collection. Completion of this Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 1) is mandatory for all research applications*. It should be completed by the Principal Investigator in consultation with any co-researchers on the project, or the student in consultation with his/her research project supervisor. *For research only involving animals please complete the Animal Ethics Review Checklist instead of this form. All researchers should:

Ensure they comply with any laws and associated Codes of Practice that may

be applicable to their area of research.

Ensure their study meets with relevant Professional Codes of Conduct.

Complete the relevant compulsory research ethics training.

Refer to the Question Specific Advice for the Stage 1 Research Ethics

Approval.

Consult the Code of Practice for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia

Ruskin University

If you are still uncertain about the answer to any question please speak to your Dissertation Supervisor/Supervisor, Faculty Research Ethics Panel (FREP) Chair or the Departmental Research Ethics Panel (DREP) Chair.

Researchers are advised that projects carrying higher levels of ethical risk will:

require the researchers to provide more justification for their research, and more detail of the intended methods to be employed;

be subject to greater levels of scrutiny;

require a longer period to review. Researchers are strongly advised to consider this in the planning phase of their

research projects.

42

Section 1: RESEARCHER AND PROJECT DETAILS

Researcher details:

Name(s):

Department:

Faculty:

Anglia Ruskin email address:

Status:

Undergraduate

Taught Postgraduate

Postgraduate Research

Staff

If this is a student project:

SID:

Course title:

Supervisor/tutor name

Project details:

Project title (not module title):

Data collection start date: (note must be prospective)

Expected project completion date:

Is the project externally funded?

Licence number (if applicable):

CONFIRMATION STATEMENTS – please tick the box to confirm you understand these requirements

The project has a direct benefit to society and/or improves knowledge and understanding.

All researchers involved have completed relevant training in research ethics, and consulted the Code of Practice for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia Ruskin University.

The risks participants, colleagues or the researchers may be exposed to have been considered and appropriate steps to reduce any risks identified taken (risk assessment(s) must be completed if applicable, available at: http://rm.anglia.ac.uk/extlogin.asp) or the equivalent for Associate Colleges.

My research will comply with the Data Protection Act (1998) and/or data protection laws of the country I am carrying the research out in, as applicable. For further advice please refer to the Question Specific Advice for the Stage 1 Research Ethics Approval.

Project summary (maximum 500 words): Please outline rationale for the research, the project aim, the research questions, research procedure and details of the participant population and how they will be recruited.

43

Section 2: RESEARCH ETHICS CHECKLIST - please answer YES or NO to ALL of the questions below.

WILL YOUR RESEARCH STUDY? YES NO

1 Involve any external organisation for which separate research ethics clearance is required (e.g. NHS, Social Services, Ministry of Justice)?

2 Involve individuals aged 16 years of age and over who lack capacity to consent and will therefore fall under the Mental Capacity Act (2005)?

3

Collect, use or store any human tissue/DNA including but not limited to serum, plasma, organs, saliva, urine, hairs and nails? Contact matt.bristow@anglia.ac.uk

4 Involve medical research with humans, including clinical trials?

5 Administer drugs, placebos or other substances (e.g. food substances, vitamins) to human participants?

6 Cause (or could cause) pain, physical or psychological harm or negative consequences to human participants?

7 Involve the researchers and/or participants in the potential disclosure of any information relating to illegal activities; or observation/handling/storage of material which may be illegal?

8 With respect to human participants or stakeholders, involve any deliberate deception, covert data collection or data collection without informed consent?

9 Involve interventions with children and young people under 16 years of age?

10 Relate to military sites, personnel, equipment, or the defence industry?

11 Risk damage or disturbance to culturally, spiritually or historically significant artefacts or places, or human remains?

12 Involve genetic modification, or use of genetically modified organisms above that of routine class one activities? Contact FST-Biologicalsafety.GMO@anglia.ac.uk (All class one activities must be described in Section 4).

13 Contain elements you (or members of your team) are not trained to conduct?

14 Potentially reveal incidental findings related to human participant health status?

15 Present a risk of compromising the anonymity or confidentiality of personal, sensitive or confidential information provided by human participants and/or organisations?

16 Involve colleagues, students, employees, business contacts or other individuals whose response may be influenced by your power or relationship with them?

17 Require the co-operation of a gatekeeper for initial access to the human participants (e.g. pupils/students, self-help groups, nursing home residents, business, charity, museum, government department, international agency)?

18 Offer financial or other incentives to human participants?

19 Take place outside of the country in which your campus is located, in full or in part?

20 Cause a negative impact on the environment (over and above that of normal daily activity)?

21 Involve direct and/or indirect contact with human participants?

22 Raise any other ethical concerns not covered in this checklist?

44

Section 3: APPROVAL PROCESS

Prior to application:

1. Researcher / student / project tutor completes ethics training . 2. Lead researcher / student completes Stage 1 Research Ethics Application form in

consultation with co-researchers / project tutor.

NO answered to all questions (Risk category 1)

(STAGE 1 APPROVAL) NO answered to question 1-13

YES answered to any question 14-22 (Risk Category 2)

(STAGE 2 APPROVAL) Yes answered to any question 3-13

(Risk Category 3B)

Research can proceed. Send this completed form to your relevant DREP for their records.

i) Complete Section 4 of this form. ii) ii) Produce Participant Information

Sheet (PIS) and Participant Consent Form (PCF) if applicable.

iii) Submit this form and PIS/ PCF where applicable to your Faculty DREP (where available) or Faculty FREP. Two members of the DREP/FREP will review the application and report to the panel, who will consider whether the ethical risks have been managed appropriately.

• Yes : DREP / FREP inform research team of approval and forward forms to FREP for recording.

• No: DREP / FREP provides feedback to researcher outlining revisions required.

The panel may recommend that the project is upgraded to Category 3 - please see below for procedure.

Complete this form and the Stage 2 Research Ethics Application form and submit to your FREP. FREP will review the application and approve the application when they are satisfied that all ethical issues have been dealt with appropriately.

Yes answered to question 1 and / or 2

(Risk Category 3A)

Submit this completed form to your FREP to inform them of your intention to apply to an external review panel for your project. For NHS (NRES) applications, the FREP Chair would normally act as sponsor / co-sponsor for your application. The outcome notification from the external review panel should be forwarded to FREP for recording.

45

Section 4: ETHICAL RISK (Risk category 2 projects only)

Management of Ethical Risk (Q14-22) For each question 14-22 ticked ‘yes’, please outline how you will manage the ethical risk posed by your study.

Section 5: Declaration

*Student/Staff Declaration By sending this form from My Anglia e-mail account I confirm that I will undertake this project as detailed above. I understand that I must abide by the terms of this approval and that I may not substantially amend the project without further approval.

**Supervisor Declaration By sending this form from My Anglia e-mail account I confirm that I will undertake to supervise this project as detailed above.

*Students to forward completed form to their Dissertation Supervisor/Supervisor. ** Dissertation Supervisor/Supervisor to forward the completed form to the relevant ethics committee. Date: August 2014 V 5.2

46

APPENDIX 9: Anglia Ruskin University: Research Ethics Application Form (Stage 2)

PLEASE COMPLETE THE FORM IN WORD PROCESSING FORMAT. HANDWRITTEN APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

Name

Faculty

Title of Proposed Research

Address

E-mail address

Type of Researcher (please tick)

Undergraduate student Postgraduate student:

Masters Doctorate Other please state…………………. Member of staff

Supervisor/Project Director

Collaborators

Expected date of commencement

Approximate duration

Externally funded Yes No

Please refer to section 3.4 of the “Guidelines for Applying for Ethical Approval at Anglia Ruskin University” to see whether you need to obtain additional insurance cover for your research.

1. Briefly describe the rationale for and state the value of the research you wish to undertake.

2. Suitability/qualifications of researchers to undertake the research. Please include details of any internal or external research ethics training you have participated in.

3. What are the aims of the research?

4. Briefly describe the overall design of the project.

5. Briefly describe the methods of data collection and analysis.

47

6. Describe the participants: give the age range, gender and any particular characteristics pertinent to the research project. For experimental studies state the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

7. If your participants are under 18 years of age, please confirm who you have applied to for a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check (if UK) or non-UK clearance, or, if not, explain below. PLEASE DO NOT ATTACH A COPY OF YOUR DBS CHECK WITH YOUR APPLICATION.

8. How will the participants be selected and recruited?

9. How many participants will be involved? For experimental studies, specify how the sample size was determined. In clinical trials, a Power calculation must be included.

10. What procedures will be carried out on the participants (if applicable)?

11. What potential risks to the participants do you foresee?

12. How do you propose to ameliorate/deal with potential risks to participants?

13. What potential risks to the interests of the researchers do you foresee?

14. How will you ameliorate/deal with potential risks to the interests of researchers?

15. Has a risk assessment been completed? (Yes/No) – link to risk assessment website - http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/rdcs/compliance/index.phtml (please be aware this must be kept on file and updated annually)

16. How will you brief and debrief participants? (Attach copy of information to be given to participants)

48

17. Will informed consent be sought from participants?

Yes (Please attach a copy of the consent form)

No

If no, please explain below:

18. If there are doubts about participants’ abilities to give informed consent, what steps have you taken to ensure that they are willing to participate?

19. If participants are under 18 years of age please describe how you will seek informed consent

20. How will consent be recorded?

21. Will participants be informed of the right to withdraw without penalty? Yes

No

If no, please detail the reasons for this:

22. How do you propose to ensure participants’ confidentiality and anonymity?

23. Please describe which of the following will be involved in your arrangements for storing data:

Manual files (e.g. paper documents or X-rays) Home or other personal computer University computer Private company or work-based computer Laptop computer Other (please define)

Please explain, for each of the above, the arrangements you will make for the security of the data (please note that any data stored on computer must have password protection as a minimum requirement):

24. Will payments be made to participants? Yes

No

If yes, please specify:

49

25. Modification of Proposal

26. (EXTERNALLY-FUNDED PROJECTS ONLY) Has the funding body been informed of and agreed to abide by Anglia Ruskin University’s Ethics Procedures and standards?

Yes

No

If no, please explain below:

27. (EXTERNALLY-FUNDED PROJECTS ONLY) Has the funder placed any restrictions on a) the conduct of the research b) publication of results?

Yes

No

If yes, please detail below:

28. Are there any further points you wish to make in justification of the proposed research?

Date: 3 September 2013 V1.0

50

RESEARCH ETHICS SUBCOMMITTEE (RESC) REGISTER The Research Ethics Subcommittee (RESC) publishes a list of approved projects on the University intranet, which is searchable by all staff and students of the University. The entry for each project comprises the following data:

project title

funding body (if appropriate)

duration of project

date and expiry of ethics approval

name of researcher Inclusion on this list is a condition of ethics approval, unless the Committee is informed of compelling reasons for an exemption. If you wish to request that your information is withheld, please tick the box below and state the reasons for your request.

I do not wish my project details to be included on the RESC list for the following reasons: Please indicate that you are enclosing with this form the following completed documents:

Participant consent form Participant Information Sheet

Summary of the research Signed Date Statement of Supervisor’s / Project Director’s support* I support this application: Signed Date Title *applications not countersigned by a supervisor/project director will not be accepted; please note that this applies equally to members of staff who are also students’

51

APPENDIX 10: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET

THIS IS A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT AND MUST BE ADAPTED FOR YOUR RESEARCH PROJECT. THE FORM MUST BE ON ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY HEADED NOTEPAPER OR HAVE THE ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY LOGO AS THE HEADER.

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET Note to researchers:

USE CLEAR AND ACCESSIBLE LANGUAGE

USE ONLY THE MOST NECESSARY TECHNICAL TERMS

Section A: The Research Project 1. Title of project 2. Purpose and value of study 3. Invitation to participate 4. Who is organising the research 5. What will happen to the results of the study 6. Source of funding for the research 7. Contact for further information

Section B: Your Participation in the Research Project 1. Why you have been invited to take part 2. Whether you can refuse to take part 3. Whether you can withdraw at any time, and how 4. What will happen if you agree to take part (brief description of procedures/tests) 5. Whether there are any risks involved (e.g. side effects from taking part) and if so what will be

done to ensure your wellbeing/safety 6. Agreement to participate in this research should not compromise your legal rights should

something go wrong 7. Whether there are any special precautions you must take before, during or after taking part in

the study 8. What will happen to any information/data/samples that are collected from you

52

9. Whether there are any benefits from taking part 10. How your participation in the project will be kept confidential

YOU WILL BE GIVEN A COPY OF THIS TO KEEP,

TOGETHER WITH A COPY OF YOUR CONSENT FORM

53

APPENDIX 11: PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM

Th THIS IS A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT AND MUST BE ADAPTED FOR YOUR RESEARCH STUDY. THIS FORM MUST BE ON ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY HEADED NOTEPAPER OR HAVE THE ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY LOGO AS THE HEADER. NAME OF PARTICIPANT: Title of the project: Main investigator and contact details: Members of the research team: 1. I agree to take part in the above research. I have read the Participant Information Sheet for the study.

I understand what my role will be in this research, and all my questions have been answered to my satisfaction.

2. I understand that I am free to withdraw from the research at any time, for any reason and without

prejudice. 3. I have been informed that the confidentiality of the information I provide will be safeguarded. 4. I am free to ask any questions at any time before and during the study. 5. I have been provided with a copy of this form and the Participant Information Sheet.

Data Protection: I agree to the University1 processing personal data which I have supplied. I agree to the processing of such data for any purposes connected with the Research Project as outlined to me* Name of participant (print)………………………….Signed………………..….Date………………

YOU WILL BE GIVEN A COPY OF THIS FORM TO KEEP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you wish to withdraw from the research, please complete the form below and return to the main investigator named above.

Title of Project: I WISH TO WITHDRAW FROM THIS STUDY Signed: __________________________________ Date: _____________________

1 “The University” includes Anglia Ruskin University and its partner colleges

Module Definition Form (MDF)

Module Code: MOD001170 Version 2 Date amended 29/Jun/2011

1. Module TitlePostgraduate Major Project

2a. Module Leader 2b. Department 2c. FacultyZilia Iskoujina Dept of Accounting, Finance

and Information ManagementLord Ashcroft InternationalBusiness School

3a. Level 3b. Module Type7 PROJECT

4a. Credits 4b. Study Hours60 600

5. RestrictionsType Module Code Module Name ConditionPre-requisites:

None

Co-requisites:

None

Exclusions: NoneCourses to which thismodule is restricted

None

LEARNING, TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT INFORMATION6a. Module DescriptionThis module support students in the preparation and submission of a Master stage project,dissertation. For 60 credits this involves a length of 15,000 words.The major project enables students to demonstrate some or all of the following:-The ability to raise significant and meaningful questions in relation to their specialism-Depth of knowledge which may involve working at the current limits of theoretical and orresearch understanding-Critical understanding of method and its relationship to knowledge-Awareness of and ability to develop solutions to ethical dilemmas likely to arise in their researchor professional practice-The ability to draw meaningful and justifiable conclusions from information which may becomplex or contradictory-The capability to expand or redefine existing knowledge; to develop new approaches tochanging situations; and contribute to the development of best practice;-The ability to communicate these processes in a clear and effective manner, as appropriate tothe 'audience'-The capability to evaluate their work from the perspective of an autonomous reflective learner.One of the main focuses for the design of this module has been the further development ofrelevant employability and professional skills. Such skills are implicit in the learning outcomes.

MDF generated on Thursday 21 November 2013, 00:11:59.48 Page 1 of 3

6a. Module Description (Continued)Multiculturalism has been considered during the design of this module and will be consideredwhen the assessment brief is written.In the course of your studies with us you may generate intellectual property which is defined asan idea, invention or creation which can be protected by law from being copied by someoneelse. By registering with us on your course you automatically assign any such intellectualproperty to us unless we agree with the organisation covering the cost of your course that this isretained by them. In consideration of you making this assignment you will be entitled to benefitfrom a share in any income generated in accordance with our Revenue Sharing Policy inoperation at that time. Details of our Intellectual Property Policy and Guidelines can be found on'MyAnglia' under Research, Development & Commercial Services or by contacting this Office fora hard copy.

6b. Outline ContentThe outline content will be appropriate to the topic and field of enquiry selected. Course Groupor course specific module guides (as well as liaison with the supervisor) will provide furtherdetail as to the resources available and the student managed learning to be undertaken.

6c. Key Texts/LiteratureWilson, J (2010), 'Essentials of Business Research: A Guide to Doing Your Research Project',London: Sage Publications.

Last Updated: 22/Jul/2010

6d. Specialist Learning ResourcesNone

7. Learning Outcomes (threshold standards)No. Type On successful completion of this module the student will be

expected to be able to:1 Knowledge and

understandingWith reference to a chosen significant and complex area forenquiry establish a method for investigation / exploration of keyconcepts, models and principles. (University outcome)

2 Knowledge andunderstanding

Critically evaluate complex issues from a variety of viewpoints

3 Knowledge andunderstanding

Develop effective arguments to support relevant conclusions

4 Intellectual, practical,affective andtransferable skills

Critically justify and rigorously apply appropriate methodologies,techniques and practical strategies; being sensitive to the context.(University outcome)

5 Intellectual, practical,affective andtransferable skills

Where appropriate formulate solutions to business or managementproblems in discussion with peers, clients, mentors and others.

6 Intellectual, practical,affective andtransferable skills

Reflect critically on the process and outcomes of the investigation/enquiry.

8a. Module Occurrence to which this MDF RefersYear Occurrence Period Location Mode of Delivery2013/4 ZZD Distance Learning

MDF generated on Thursday 21 November 2013, 00:11:59.48 Page 2 of 3

8a. Module Occurrence to which this MDF Refers (Continued)Year Occurrence Period Location Mode of Delivery

Template ForDistance LearningDelivery

8b. Learning Activities for the above Module OccurrenceLearningActivities

Hours LearningOutcomes

Details of Duration, frequency and other comments

Lectures 0 None NoneOther teachermanagedlearning

4 1-6A minimum of 4 hours individual supervision, butadditional group support may be available asappropriate to the topic area

Studentmanagedlearning

596 1-6 As directed by supervisors and/or course group/course module guides

TOTAL 600

9. Assessment for the above Module OccurrenceAssessment

No.Assessment

MethodLearning

OutcomesWeighting (%) Fine Grade or

Pass/FailQualifying Mark

(%)010 Coursework 1-6 100 Fine Grade 40

Details: Report : 15000 words or equivalent. Compensation does not applyIn order to pass this module, students are required to achieve an overall mark of 40%.In addition, students are required to:(a) achieve the qualifying mark for each element of fine grade assessment as specifiedabove(b) pass any pass/fail elements.

MDF generated on Thursday 21 November 2013, 00:11:59.48 Page 3 of 3