ASSESSMENT BRIEF – four
COURSE: Bachelor of Enterprise / Bachelor of Accounting
Unit Title: Management for Managers
Sort of Evaluation: Complete case examine
Size/Period: Self Reflective Abstract – 2500 phrases
Unit Studying Outcomes addressed: 1. Perceive the ideas and theories of management.
2. Establish varied management kinds.
three. Establish the significance of management qualities for managers.
four. Perceive how management is utilized in observe in groups and in an organisation.
5. Improve expertise to develop management in an organisation.
6. Select an efficient and moral management fashion in a piece surroundings.
7. Display a cohesive data of the ideas and theories of management
Submission Date: Week 14
Evaluation Activity: Complete case examine evaluation
Whole Mark: 40 marks
College students are suggested that submission of an Evaluation Activity previous the due date with no formally signed permitted AssignmentExtension Type (Kent Web site MyKent Pupil Hyperlink FORM–Project Extension
Utility Type–Pupil LoginRequired)or beforehand permitted utility for different extenuating circumstances impacting course of examine, incurs a 5% penalty per calendar day, calculatedby deduction from the entire mark.
For instance. An AssessmentTask marked out of 40 will incur a 2 mark penalty for eachcalendar day.
Extra info, please consult with (Kent Web site MyKent Pupil Hyperlink POLICY – Evaluation Coverage &
Procedures– Pupil Login Required)
Your closing evaluation is a person written task of approx 2,500 phrases as per the next description:
College students are required to reply questions primarily based on two complete case research. Phrase restrict of every case examine is 1,250 phrases. These case research can be uploaded on the Moodle website in week 10 together with the rules to try it.
The ultimate evaluation for all college students is due at 11.59 pm on Sunday of Week 14.
The task should be submitted on-line in Moodle. All supplies should be submitted electronically in Microsoft Phrase format (different codecs e.g., pdf or mac file might not be readable by markers). No paper-based or hardcopy submission can be accepted.
Please notice that that is a person evaluation and any similarity rating larger than 20% can be handled as tutorial misconduct.
No referencing of sources is required for both a part of this closing evaluation. MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC): 40%
Marking Standards. Fail (Zero-9.9) Go (10-12.5) Credit score (13-14.5) Distinction (15-16.5) Excessive Distinction (1720)
10 Marks Little proof of analysis. Sources are lacking, Inappropriate, poorly built-in or missing credibility. Lacks clear hyperlink of sources with essay Textbook and four different related peer reviewed sources. Fundamental use of sources to assist concepts, usually nicely built-in, most sources are credible. Could also be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/utility Analysis is usually thorough. Good use of sources to assist concepts, largely nicely built-in, sources are credible. Could also be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/ utility. Thorough analysis is indicated. Excellent use of sources to assist concepts, nicely built-in, sources are credible. Could also be minor weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/utility. Thorough analysis is indicated. Skilled use of sources to assist concepts, nicely built-in, sources are credible. Very minor, if any, weaknesses with paraphrasing integration/utility.
Info / Content material
10 Marks Report lacks coherence; subject is poorly addressed; little evaluation. Report is usually coherent; subject is addressed; analyses in affordable depth with some description. There are some inconsistencies and weaknesses with circulate. Report is coherent and flows nicely; subject is addressed fairly totally; analyses in appreciable depth. There could also be some inconsistencies and weaknesses with circulate. Report could be very coherent and flows nicely; subject is addressed totally; analyses in depth. There could also be minor inconsistencies and weak point with circulate. Skilled work. Report could be very coherent and flows nicely; subject is addressed totally; analyses in nice depth. Very minor, if any, inconsistencies and weaknesses with circulate.
10 Marks Matter, ideas aren’t clear in introduction. Materials within the physique is usually poorly sequenced. No discernible conclusion; no hyperlinks to introduction. Matter, ideas are usually said with some readability in introduction. Materials in physique is usually logically sequenced; some weaknesses. Conclusion doesn’t clearly summarise report, hyperlinks to introduction aren’t clear. Matter, ideas are reasonably outlined in introduction. Materials in physique is logically and broadly sequenced; with some minor weaknesses. Conclusion broadly summarises report
and broadly hyperlinks to introduction. Matter, ideas are clearly outlined in introduction. Materials in physique is logically and clearly sequenced; only a few or minor weaknesses. Conclusion largely successfully summarises report with suggestions and
clear hyperlinks to introduction. Matter, ideas are clearly outlined in introduction. Materials in physique is logically and clearly sequenced; very minor, if any, weaknesses. Conclusion successfully summarises report with suggestions and clear hyperlinks to introduction.
Referencing 5 marks
Whole 10marks Poor normal of writing. Phrase restrict might not be adhered to. No or minimal reference record, blended kinds. Most 1000 phrases Fundamental and sound normal of writing; some errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Reference record is usually full with 1 or 2 references lacking. Good normal of writing; few errors
in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Few inaccuracies in reference record and all references listed. Excellent normal of writing; only a few or minor errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Thorough and constant reference record and all references listed. Skilled normal of writing; no errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Skilled
degree of referencing and acknowledgment; no errors of fashion evident.
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS [NOT APPLICABLE FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT]
Content material for Evaluation Activity papers ought to incorporate a proper introduction, details and conclusion.
Acceptable tutorial writing and referencing are inevitable tutorial expertise that you have to develop and reveal in work being introduced for evaluation. The content material of top quality work introduced by a pupil should be totally referenced within-text citations and a Reference Record on the finish. Kent strongly recommends you consult with the Tutorial Studying Assist Workshop supplies out there on the Kent Studying Administration System (Moodle). For particulars please click on the hyperlink http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606 and obtain the file titled “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Website is the placement for Workbooks and data which can be introduced to Kent College students within the ALS Workshops performed firstly of every Trimester.
Kent recommends a minimal of FIVE (5) references in work being introduced for evaluation. Except in any other case particularly instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed within the Unit Define for the precise Evaluation Activity, any paper with lower than 5 (5) references could also be deemed not assembly a passable normal and probably be failed.
Content material in Evaluation duties that features sources that aren’t correctly referenced based on the “Harvard Referencing Workbook” can be penalised.
Marks can be deducted for failure to stick to the phrase rely if that is particularly said for the Evaluation Activity within the Unit Define. As a common rule there’s an allowable discretionary variance to the phrase rely in that it’s usually accepted pupil could go over or beneath by 10% than the said size.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING [NOT APPLICABLE FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT]
References are assessed for his or her high quality. College students ought to draw on high quality tutorial sources, akin to books, chapters from edited books, journals and many others. The textbook for the Unit of examine can be utilized as a reference, however not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will wish to see proof pupil is able to conducting their very own analysis. Additionally, so as to assist Assessors decide a pupil’s understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not simply direct quotes) should embrace the precise web page quantity(s) if proven within the authentic.
Earlier than getting ready your Evaluation Activity or personal contribution, please assessment this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism by way of Referencing) by clicking on the next hyperlink: hyperlink: http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
A seek for peer-reviewed journal articles can also help college students. These kind of journal articles could be situated within the on-line journal databases and could be accessed from the Kent Library homepage. Wikipedia, on-line dictionaries and on-line encyclopaedias are acceptable as a place to begin to realize data a few subject, however shouldn’t be over-used – these ought to represent not more than 10% of your complete record of references/sources. Extra info and literature can be utilized the place these are produced by respectable sources, akin to authorities departments, analysis institutes such because the Nationwide Well being and Medical Analysis Council (NHMRC), or worldwide organisations such because the World Well being Organisation (WHO). Authentic organisations and authorities departments produce peer reviewed studies and articles and are subsequently very helpful and largely very present. The content material of the next hyperlink explains why it isn’t acceptable to make use of non-peer reviewed web sites (Why cannot I simply Google?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39mnu1Pkgw (thanks to La Trobe College for entry to this video).