Assessment 2 – Individual report (2000 words maximum) 1. What is a literature review and what does it achieve? 30 marks 2. Write a literature review on the topic “Corporate Social Responsibility” 70 marks You are advice to use a minimum of six sources and base your review on literature published during the last Ten years This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes: LO3: Demonstrate the ability to summarise and critically evaluate previous works in relation to the research problem being investigated. LO4: Utilise library and media services effectively, including the ability to use Harvard referencing correctly and construct appropriate responses to assignment tasks. LO5: Ability to gather valuable information and ideas that can guide research.   MARKING CRITERIA AND STUDENT FEEDBACK – ASSIGNMENT 2 This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit from development/improvement. Common Assessment Criteria Applied Marks available Marks awarded What is a literature review and what is its purpose? How does a literature review contribute to the concept of academic work and study? What specific role does it play? 30 Write a literature review on the topic Corporate Social Responsibility What is the specific issue that the literature review helps to define? What is already known/ understood about this topic? Has anything similar been done in this area before? Scope and appropriateness of literature reviewed. How was literature search conducted? Quality of referencing. Number of sources cited. How many different theorists mentioned? Ability to summarise and compare different authors’ viewpoints and use of English Reviewer’s stance. Weaknesses/strengths and omissions in literature reviewed 70 10 10 15 10 10 15 Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. ) Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate) Capped at 40% 100 % MAXIMUM LENGTH Assessment 1: 1000 words (+/1 10%). Assessment 2: 2000 words (+/- 10%). FORMATTING AND LAYOUT Please note the following when completing your written assignment: 1. Writing: Written in English in an appropriate style 2. Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment. 3. Formatting: Typed in Times New Roman or Garamond font 12, with pages numbered in the footer. 4. Document format: Essay for task 1 and Report for task 2 5. Provide a clear title, course, and name or ID number on a cover sheet 6. Provide a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout. 7. Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive.   Assessment Criteria: An outstanding Distinction 90 – 100 Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard. A very strong distinction 80 – 89 Work of distinguished quality which is based on a rigorous and broad knowledge base, and demonstrating sustained ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and interpret concepts, principles and data within field of study, using defined principles, techniques and/or standard formats and applications. This will form the basis for the development of sound arguments and judgements appropriate to the field of study/ assessment task. There will be strong evidence of competence across a range of specialised skills, using them to plan, develop and evaluate problem solving strategies, and of the capability to operate autonomously and self-evaluate with guidance in varied structured contexts. Outputs will be communicated effectively, accurately and reliably. A clear Distinction 71 – 79 Work of very good quality which displays most but not all of the criteria for the grade above. A Distinction 70 Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills. A very strong Merit 67 – 69 Work of commendable quality based on a strong factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, including an assured grasp of concepts and principles, together with effective deployment of skills relevant to the discipline and assessment task. There will be clear evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application, and the ability to work effectively within defined guidelines to meet defined objectives. There will be consistent evidence of capability in all relevant subject based and key skills, including the ability to self-evaluate and work autonomously under guidance and to use effectively specified standard techniques in appropriate contexts. A strong merit 64 – 66 Work of good quality which contains most, but not all of the characteristics of the grade above. A clear Merit 61 – 63 Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills. Merit 60 Work of sound quality based on a firm factual/ conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, demonstrating a good grasp of relevant principles/concepts, together with the ability to organise and communicate effectively. The work may be rather standard, but will be mostly accurate and provide some evidence of the ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and apply standard methods/techniques, under guidance. There will be no serious omissions or inaccuracies. There will be good evidence of ability to take responsibility for own learning, to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, selecting and using relevant techniques, and to demonstrate competence in relevant key skills. A very strong Pass 55 – 59 Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of grade above. A strong Pass 50 – 54 Work of satisfactory quality demonstrating a reliable knowledge base and evidence of developed key skills and/or subject based skills, but containing limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application. A Pass 41 – 49 Work of broadly satisfactory quality covering adequately the factual and/or conceptual knowledge base of the field of study and appropriately presented and organised, but is primarily descriptive or derivative, with only occasional evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application. There may be some misunderstanding of key concepts/principles and limitations in the ability to select relevant material or techniques and/or in communication or other relevant skills, so that the work may include some errors, omissions or irrelevancies. There will be evidence of ability to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, using standard techniques, and to meet threshold standards in relevant key skills. A bare Pass 40 Work of bare pass standard demonstrating some familiarity with and grasp of a factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, together with evidence of some ability to employ specialist skills to solve problems within area of study, but only just meeting threshold standards in e.g. evaluation and interpretation of data and information, reasoning and soundness of judgment, communication, application, or quality of outputs. Work may be characterised by some significant errors, omissions or problems, but there will be sufficient evidence of development and competence to operate in specified contexts taking responsibility for the nature and quality of outputs. A marginal Fail 30 – 39 Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with area of study in relation to acquisition of knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles, and of specialist skills, but which is essentially misinterpreted, and misapplied and/or contains some significant omission or misunderstanding, or otherwise just fails to meet threshold standards in e.g. communication, application or quality of outputs. A Fail 20 – 29 Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in relation to one or more area of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills. It may address the assessment task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with some of the subject matter, but such satisfactory characteristics will be clearly outweighed by major deficiencies across remaining areas. A comprehensive Fail 0 – 19 Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal understanding, application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity with knowledge or skills appropriate to the field of study or task and/or demonstrate inadequate capability in key skills essential to the task concerned. Non-submission/Nil attempt 0 Nothing, or nothing of merit, presented.