|
Scope of assignment (20 marks) (includes: breadth/depth of knowledge, focus on topic, support of arguments).
- Demonstrates understanding of the nature of IHRM
- Considers contemporary needs of business in strategic decisions.
- Identifies key issues for discussion
- Provides support for observations.
- Discussion is focused on the requirements of the question (ie. does not noticeably digress from the topic and incorporate irrelevant issues).
|
Topic not fully covered.
Discussion too brief. Overuse of quotations, with little explanation.
Insufficient support from literature.
Limited original thoughts
|
A reasonably balanced summary of the issues reflected in the study materials pertinent to the assignment topic.
Some explanation, illustration and support for arguments presented is provided from the literature.
Presentation meets most of the main protocols.
|
A fuller, more systematic exploration of the assignment topic, which may include an attempt at critical comment or appraisal.
Regular support provided from the literature.
Few presentation flaws.
|
A comprehensive exploration of the topic, with sound critical comment and a personal synthesis of the issues examined.
Demonstrates understanding, interpretation and presentation of ideas and arguments.
Detailed support provided from literature.
|
Clear and exact understanding, interpretation and presentation of ideas and arguments relevant to the assignment task.
Demonstrates appropriate selection and integration of ideas and theory.
Demonstrates breadth and depth of understanding and has insights and awareness of deeper more subtle aspects of the topic content.
Evidence of originality and independent thought.
|
|
Structure (15 marks)
(Includes: Organisation of ideas, logical argument, use of support/evidence)
- Use of correctly structured argument
- Addresses issues clearly, and develops a relevant line of argument
- Discussion/argument is presented, developed and supported in a standard appropriate to level of study.
|
Lack introduction and conclusion. Opening paragraph simply restates the topic.
Unclear direction/outline of intended discussion provided for the reader.
Some major aspect of the topic missed.
Weak arguments and/or full of unsubstantiated statements made.
|
Main arguments and conclusions presented in the introduction and conclusion paragraphs.
Definitions provided in the context of the discussion.
Main points discussed in logically sequential paragraphs.
Summary in final paragraph.
|
Main arguments and conclusions clearly presented in the introduction and conclusion paragraphs.
Demonstrated knowledge of principles and concepts relevant to topic.
Relevant key theories and ideas explored in a manner appropriate to the assignment.
Demonstrated thorough understanding of material presented in study materials.
|
Main arguments and conclusions clearly presented in the introduction and conclusion paragraphs.
Main points of the discussion are examined critically, ideas synthesised well to produce a logically constructed and supported argument.
Fluent writing style appropriate to the assessment tasks.
Main points discussed in logically sequential paragraphs.
Summary in final paragraph.
|
Main arguments and conclusions clearly presented in the introduction and conclusion paragraphs.
Provides strong, clearly articulated arguments, with supporting evidence from literature and/or real world examples.
Fluent writing style appropriate to the assessment tasks.
Main points discussed in logically sequential paragraphs.
Summary in final paragraph.
|
|
Evidence of reading (10 marks) (Includes: range of suitable references used, correct referencing/citation technique)
- Discussion demonstrates evidence of reading beyond the study materials
- Suitable references have been used to enhance and support issues raised in the discussion
- Source material has been cited and referenced correctly
|
Limited evidence of wide reading.
Readings not well integrated into the discussions of the essay.
Limited and / or no acknowledgement of source material.
|
The text of the assignment shows some evidence that subject materials have been read and acknowledged.
Arguments show basic ability to apply fundamental concepts, but arguments based upon limited evidence.
An accurate bibliography is attached.
|
Well-reasoned arguments are supported and with reference to a broad range of literature, drawn for materials sources beyond the study materials provided.
Reading is integrated into the discussion well, and analytical and evaluative comment sis provided where appropriate.
Accurate referencing and citation (some flaws).
|
Evidence of having read beyond the core materials.
Able to consider topic/issues in eth broader disciplinary context.
Evidence of synthesis, analytical skills and independent thought.
Accurate referencing and citation (few flaws).
|
Evidence of having researched/read more widely beyond the core material.
Accurate referencing and citation (almost flawless).
|
|
Presentation (5 marks)
(Includes: clarity of expression and presentation of ideas)
- Follows presentation guidelines presented in Subject Outline
- Correct use of APA referencing style
- Written in clear, comprehensible English
|
Expression is unclear with weak presentation (structure, citations) and English (grammar, spelling, punctuation) errors.
|
Expression and presentation are comprehensible but lack clarity,
|
Expression is lucid and clear with precise use of language. Writing style appropriate to the assignment type.
Few flaws in grammar and spelling.
|
Expression and presentation of ideas are mainly accurate.
Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment item.
Grammar and spelling accurate
|
Expression and presentation of ideas are developed and clear. Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment item.
Grammar and spelling accurate
|
HOST COUNTRY ANALYSIS AND INTERNATIONAL HRM ISSUES