Assignment 3 - Personal Development Portfolio

Academic Analysis Section

Assignment 3 is an individual piece of work. The assignment consists of a 2000 words (1500+500) report where you are required to research an innovative and entrepreneurial business and analyse how they are managing the different aspects of their business relating it to the concepts you have studied so far in this module. You need to give a good overview of entrepreneurship and the business in the introduction. You need to choose TWO concepts from the four areas below and analyse the chosen business in relevance to them in detail in the academic analysis section. You also then need to come up with recommendations on how the business can improve and expand. This part will be 1500 words:

Business functions
Operations management
4P’s for the business
Innovation and Creativity

You have to choose ONE business from below:

Chobani
Leon
Metro Bank
Go Fund me
Africa’s Talking
TOMS Shoes

You are then required to reflect in 500 words on your learning so far in the module and the skills that are required to improve your academic and professional career. For example self-confidence, team working, decision-making, communication and negotiation skills, leadership and time management skills.

Assignment Criteria:

In depth knowledge of the business
Analysing the business by using two concepts and Linking theory to practice
Coming up with realistic recommendations for the business
Thoughtful and quality reflection
Professional report presentation and Harvard referencing

Assignment can be 10% more than the suggested word limit.

Grading Scheme for Assignment 3 for MN4001QA Assignment 3 Personal Development Portfolio
Marking criteria	Letter grade	Mark recorded
The extent to which the work shows evidence of EXCELLENT Analysis and reflection: · Excellent In depth knowledge of the business · Analysing the business by using two concepts and Linking theory to practice · Excellent realistic recommendations for the business · Thoughtful and quality reflection-Excellent understanding of what worked well and areas of development · Exceptional Professional report presentation and Harvard referencing · Excellent use of theory to help explain different aspects of Business · Excellent choice and use of appropriate material. Clear evidence of practice. · Excellent Clear structure and professional presentation · Harvard Referencing - Evidence of wide reading, application and referencing. - Minimum 5 academic references	A+	95
	A	85
	A-	75
The extent to which the work shows evidence of GOOD Analysis and reflection: · Good In depth knowledge of the business · Analysing the business by using two concepts and Linking theory to practice · Good realistic recommendations for the business · Thoughtful and quality reflection- Good understanding of what worked well and areas of development · Professional report presentation and Harvard referencing · Good use of theory to help explain different aspects of Business · Good choice and use of appropriate material. Clear evidence of practice. · Clear structure and professional presentation · Harvard Referencing - Evidence of wide reading, application and referencing. Minimum 5 academic references	B+	67
	B	63
The extent to which the work shows evidence of ACCEPTABLE Analysis and reflection: · Acceptable In depth knowledge of the business · Analysing the business by using two concepts and Linking theory to practice · Coming up with some realistic recommendations for the business · Thoughtful and quality reflection- Acceptable understanding of what worked well and areas of development · Professional report presentation and Harvard referencing · Acceptable use of theory to help explain different aspects of Business · Acceptable choice and use of appropriate material. Some evidence of practice. · Acceptable structure and professional presentation · Harvard Referencing -Lack of wider reading, application and referencing	C+	57
	C	53
You need to develop a greater understanding of the Assignment criteria The extent to which the work shows evidence of ACCEPTABLE BUT FURTHER IMPROVEMENT in Analysis and reflection: · Lack In depth knowledge of the business · Little Evidence of Analysing the business by using two concepts and Linking theory to practice · Poor recommendations for the business · Lack of Thoughtful and quality reflection- understanding of what worked well and areas of development · Less evidence of Professional report presentation and Harvard referencing · Poor/Little use of theory to help explain different aspects of Business · Poor choice and use of appropriate material. Some evidence of practice. · Lack of clear structure and professional presentation · Harvard Referencing needs improvement -Lack of wider reading, application and referencing.	D+	47
	D	43
Does not address the task set. Presents minimal material related to the topic. Little evidence of understanding of the assignment criteria. Poor structure. Evidence of poor research. Little or no use of Academic sources	F1	37
Does not address the task set. Little evidence of understanding either the task or the subject matter. No evidence of scholarship. No evidence of research.	F2	23
Fail – Non-attendance and non-engagement.	F3	0

University Grading Scheme for Undergraduate Programmes: 2017/18

Following discussion at Academic Board (13^th September 2017), it was agreed to implement a revised grading scheme for undergraduate programmes for the 2017/18 academic year.

What is the new grading scheme?

The scheme uses a 12-point letter grading, replacing the previous continuous percentage scale, as above. This grading scheme applies to all assessment components on all UG modules which would previously have been marked using the percentage scale – exceptions are marking of numerically based work or a pass/fail assessments. This grading scheme is to be used for all UG students who are new enrolments on modules in 2017/18 – whether this is their first attempt at the module or a retake of the module. Students doing reassessments only in 2017/18 should be marked as for their original assessment.

Numerically based work and pass/fail assessments

When an assignment or exam is based on numerical work (such as online multiple choice tests which generate a specific number of correct answers, or where there are a series of questions with a set number of marks assigned to each answer) the full range of marks from 0 to 100 should be used, that is, they should not be ‘translated’ into a letter grade). Assessments which are marked on a pass/fail basis such as placements) should continue to be marked on a pass/fail basis.

Using the grading scheme

The process for marking work under the new grading scheme is as follows:

Assign the appropriate letter grade by considering the criteria specified on the table under each category.
Students should be given their letter grade along with their feedback. It should be clear to the students how the criteria have been applied to assess their work.
The mark entered onto Evision should be the spot percentage which corresponds to the letter grade on the table (e.g., a grade of A should be entered as 85%, a grade of C as 53%).

Calculation of module grades

If a module is assessed by more than one unit of assessment, the percentage marks should be averaged (with appropriate weighting) to produce the module result. As the module result is calculated by averaging marks, it will not necessarily be one of the fixed percentages on the scale.

Get instant help from 5000+ experts for