Assessment Brief 2
Assessment Brief 2 Small Business Management LSBM305 Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 1 Index 1. Module Details 2 2. Assessment Structure 2 3. Learning Outcomes for the item of assessment 2 4. Assessment Grading 3 5. Assessment 2 Details 3 5.1 Task 3 5.2 Submission requirements 3 6. Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances 4 6.1 Extensions 4 6.2 Mitigating circumstances 4 7. Word limits 5 Appendix 1: Grade Criteria 6 Appendix 2: Declaration of Authorship 0 Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 2 1. Module Details LSBM305 6 30 Nisreen Ameen 2017-2018 2. Assessment Structure BABM/LSBM305/1718 This assignment is worth 60% of the module grade The word limit for this assessment is 3,000 Monday/23 April 2018/3pm Feedback and provisional grades will normally be due 20 working days after the submission deadline 12-15 June 2018 3. Learning Outcomes for the item of assessment This item of assessment covers the following learning outcomes. For the full list of learning outcomes for the module, please refer to the Module Study Guide. Distinguish between business ideas and opportunities. Identify the essential ingredients to being a successful entrepreneur. Assess the characteristics of successful small businesses. Critically analyse and evaluate the entrepreneurial process through which business ideas may be evaluated. Critically discuss, analyse and evaluate the benefits and potential drawbacks of owning a small business. Identify and describe team building dynamics.(C3) 1 The grade is provisional until confirmed by the relevant assessment board(s). Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 3 4. Assessment Grading Your work will be marked in grades rather than percentages. This is considered to deliver the most accurate and fair outcomes for students. Each assignment that you undertake will be assessed using the common grading system. Information about the grading system can be found in your Course Handbook. The Grade Criteria can be found in Appendix 1. 5. Assessment 2 Details 5.1 Task Students are required to undertake comprehensive research on any UK business from a clearly defined sector, and provide a rationale for a business portfolio; drawing upon materials from the lectures and workshops over the semester. You are required to: 1) explain why your chosen business, may or may not, qualify as a small business 2) provide the general background of your chosen business and explain how it competes within its sector 3) draft a detailed business portfolio on the company, based on a rigorous, comprehensive and detailed knowledge base of theory/literature from at least three topics covered in class 4) draw sound, reasoned conclusions, make recommendations and/or discuss the implications for the business within its sector. The word length for this assignment is 3,000 words. This excludes your references and any appendices. This assessment constitutes 60% of the overall assessment for the module. Guidance notes A student portfolio is a systematic collection of student work and related material that depicts a students activities, accomplishments, and/or achievements in a subject. Some notable advantages for portfolio assessment include, but are not limited to, enabling measurement of multiple dimensions of student progress by including different types of data and materials. This progress would be documented in your lectures, seminars and workshops over the course of the semester. 5.2 Submission requirements You are required to submit this assignment by Monday/23 April 2018/3pm. You must submit your assignment by using the Turnitin gateway in the modules Canvas site. Please Note: The act of submitting your work electronically will be taken as an acceptance of the Declaration of Authorship (see Appendix 2). Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 4 6. Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances Applications for extensions and mitigating circumstances, with supporting evidence (such as medical certificates), should be made through the Student Self-service Portal (SSP). 6.1 Extensions If a student experiences unforeseen circumstances that may prevent the student submitting an assignment at the first opportunity, it is possible to request an extension of up to two weeks. The length of extension requested will be evaluated by the Academic Administrator. The granting of an extension will depend upon the nature of the difficulty the student is experiencing, whether the difficulty could and should have been anticipated, and the extent to which the circumstances were outside of the students control. For example, health difficulties would usually provide legitimate grounds for an extension; last minute computer issues or clashing deadlines would not. If an extension of up to two weeks is not sufficient the student should make a claim for mitigating circumstances. NB: No extensions can be granted for TCAs and examinations. 6.2 Mitigating circumstances If a student is unable to sit an exam or submit an assignment, the student may be able to claim mitigating circumstances, which, if accepted, would allow the student to complete the assessment for the first time at a later date, and receive an uncapped mark for it. The exam would be taken at the next sitting or the assignment would be submitted at the next submission opportunity, following the acceptance of the students mitigating circumstances. A claim for mitigating circumstances must be submitted before the original date for submitting the assignment or sitting the exam. Mitigating circumstances are defined as a serious or acute problem, or an event beyond a students control or ability to foresee, which has prevented completion of assignment/s or attendance at examination/s. If a student is experiencing unforeseen or unexpected events such as serious illness or severe disruption to their personal life that may affect the students ability to take assignment/s or sit examination/s, the student should meet with their Module Leader, Course Leader or a Student Success Advisor to discuss the available options. The University of Northamptons Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedure document can be accessed through our Quality and Enhancement Manual: www.lsbm.ac.uk/sr-universitypartners Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 5 7. Word limits All written assignments include clear guidance on the maximum amount that should be written in order to address the requirements of the assessment task (a word limit). If the submission exceeds the word limit by more than 10%, the submission will only be marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be included in the final grade for the item of assessment. Abstracts, reference lists, and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements. Where a submission is notably under the word limit, the full submission will be marked on the extent to which the requirements of the assessment task have been met. Generally speaking, submissions under the word limit fall short of the requirements of the assessment task. Assessment Brief: LSBM305 2017-18 Page 6 Appendix 1: Grade Criteria An outstanding Distinction A+ Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard A very strong Distinction A Work of distinguished quality which demonstrates strong, convincing and consistent evidence appropriate to the task or activity. Rigorous and authoritative command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A clear Distinction A- Work of very good quality which displays most, but not all, of the criteria for the grade above in relation to the learning outcomes. A Distinction B+ Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relation to the relevant learning outcomes. A very strong Merit B Work of commendable quality which demonstrates good, robust and convincing evidence appropriate to the task or activity. Strong command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A strong Merit B- Work of good quality which contains most, but not all, of the characteristics of the grade above in relation to the learning outcomes. A clear Merit C+ Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills. A Merit C Work of sound quality which demonstrates evidence which is sufficient and appropriate to the task or activity. Sound command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A very strong Pass OR Bare/Basic Merit C- Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of the grade above in relation to the relevant learning outcomes. A strong Pass D+ Work of satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of reliably achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree. Acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A Pass D Work of broadly satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree. Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A bare Pass D- Work of bare pass standard which demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but only to a limited degree. Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A marginal Fail F+ Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with the learning outcomes but which contains some significant omissions or misunderstanding, or otherwise just fails to meet threshold standards. A Fail F Evidence included or provided, but missing in some very important aspects. Poor command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. A comprehensive Fail F- Negligible or inappropriate evidence. Unsatisfactory command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline. Academic Misconduct AG Work submitted, but academic misconduct proven and penalty given was to award AG grade. Late submission LG Work submitted but given an LG grade due to late submission. Work of nil value NG Work submitted, but work comprises no value. Non-submission/Nil attempt G Nothing presented. Appendix 2: Declaration of Authorship By submitting this work electronically to LSBM and the University of Northampton, I/we confirm that I/we have read and understood the Declaration and Definitions below: Declaration of Authorship: 1. I/we hold a copy of this assignment which can be produced if the original is lost/damaged. 2. This assignment is my/our original work and no part of it has been copied from any other students work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made. 3. No part of this assignment has been written for me/us by any other person except where such collaboration has been authorised and as detailed in the Assessment Brief. 4. I/we have not previously submitted this work for any other course/module. Definitions I/we understand that: 5. Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is ones own. It is a form of cheating and is a serious academic offence which may lead to expulsion. Plagiarised material can be drawn from, and presented in, written, graphic and visual form, including electronic data, and oral presentations. Plagiarism occurs when the origin of the material used is not appropriately cited. 6. Collusion is working with someone else on an assessment task which is intended to be wholly your own work. 7. Contract cheating/Commissioning is where you contract out academic assessment to writers and purchase back the finished work and submit it as your own. 8. Duplication/Replication is submitting the same material more than once for the purposes of obtaining academic credit. 9. Fabrication refers specifically to the falsification of data, information or citations in an academic exercise, typically an assignment. This includes false excuses for missing deadlines and false claims to have submitted work. It may be specifically referred to as falsification. 10. Your completed assignment is submitted and checked for plagiarism through the use of plagiarism detection software called Turnitin. The Course Leaders decision based on the plagiarism report is final; no appeal may be made by a student once such a decision is made. Please note: Submitting work which is not your own [and cheating in exams] can be considered as fraud2 and handled in accordance with the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. Penalties can include: Reduction in grade for assignment. Grade for module reduced to AG [fail for academic misconduct] and right to repeat module withdrawn. Termination from studies. Further information on plagiarism can be found in your Course Handbooks Section 13.10. 2 If a student is suspected of commissioning (e.g. paying someone to write an assignment for them), this could be classed as fraud under student disciplinary procedures, separate to academic misconduct procedures. If proven, the consequences would be severe, including removal from their course of study.