| Module code and title: | Orientation for Success in Higher Education. | Module leader: | Sonny Obanore |
| Assignment No. and type: | Essay – 1500 words 50% | Assessment weighting: | 50% |
| Submission time and date: | Before 14:00 pm onTuesday 19/04/2022. | Target feedback time and date: | 3 weeks from the date of final submission |
| Assignment task | ||
| This assignment requires you to reflect on your learning from the module in order toexplain the importance of a reflective approach to learning and the value of formative feedback to inform and improve summative assessed work. | ||
| This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes: | ||
| LO 1 | Understand the importance of a reflective approach to learning within Business and Management discipline; | □ |
| LO 2 | Demonstrate an ability to use feedback and feedforward as an integral to inform and improve future formative and summative assessed work; | □ |
| Task requirements | ||
| OVERVIEW This assignment will encourage students to apply the learning from the module to a topic and will be submitted in form of an essay. Part 1- Essay (1,500 words) – 50% Task: Discuss the importance of reflective learning and describe how a reflective approach to feedback and feedforward can inform and improve future formative and summative assessed work. DESCRIPTION OF THE TASK – WHAT YOU ARE BEING ASKED TO DO The guidance below sets out the requirements of the task and a suggested structure for the essay. Introduction (150 words) your introduction should state the aim of the essay, define reflective learning and other key concepts, and outline the content of the essay. The content of the essay shouldinclude a relevant model of reflection, description of a reflective approach to feedback and feedforward and how this can inform and improve formative and summative assessments. First body paragraph (400 words) should describe reflection and reflective approach to learning, using a relevant model of reflection (e.g., Gibbs, 1988) Second body paragraph (400 words) should describe the nature of feedback and feedforward, and the use of your chosen model for reflection on feedback and feedforward Third body paragraph (400 words)should describe how a reflective approach to feedback and feedforwardcan inform and improve future formative and summative assessments. Conclusion (150 words) your conclusion should link back to the aim of the essay and briefly restate your main points in addition to your final thought or reflection on the significance of the topic. Word count: 1500 words +/– 150 words. You must reference all information used in the essay, using the Harvard Referencing Guide. See attached grid for grade descriptors. Notes: The task requirement is anessay not a report or reflective journal. You must therefore ensure that your structure, outline, content, style and presentation accord with academic writing conventions for an essay.You must use the correct Canterbury Harvard Referencing conventions* for your in-text citations and reference listYou must use and reference at least four of the core texts and academic resource materials provided in Moodle.You must use a minimum of 15 sources including textbooks, journals, and other reliable and credible published and web sources. Do not use Wikipedia or unverifiable blogs 5. Include your studentID number, module name, tutor name, academic year/group bubble in your cover page which should be the first page of your essay *Please refer to the Canterbury Harvard Referencing Guide. | ||
| Referencing and research requirements | ||
| Please reference your work according to the Canterbury Harvard style guidance which you can access on Moodle | ||
| How your work will be assessed | ||
| Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend upon your use of academic referencing conventions. This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 0. | ||
| Submission details | ||
| This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time). Please ensure that your work has been saved in an appropriate file format (Microsoft Word, Excel or PowerPoint, or PDF are the most widely used; Google Docs is also accepted). Your file must also contain at least 20 words of text, consist of fewer than 400 pages and be less than 40MB in size. You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations. | ||
| Submission date and time | ||
| This assignment should be submitted before 14:00UK time onTuesday19/04/2022. For conformity, It is essential to use the assignment guide in conjunction with the assignment brief. |
| Provision at Level 0 (often forming part of a Foundation Year course) is designed to prepare students for higher education. At the end of Level 3, students will be expected to demonstrate the acquisition of foundation level skills, knowledge and understanding necessary to embark on a higher education programme of study at Level 4. In accordance with the national Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF), this includes the ability to identify and use relevant understanding, methods and skills to complete tasks and address problems that, while well defined, have a measure of complexity. It includes taking responsibility for initiating and completing tasks and procedures as well as exercising autonomy and judgement within limited parameters. It also reflects awareness of different perspectives or approaches within an area of study or work. A pass mark (40% or above) demonstrates achievement of all learning outcomes associated with the module assessment | |||||
| Assessment category | |||||
| Introductory knowledge and understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s) | Cognitive and intellectual skills | Reading and referencing | Presentation, style and structure Work that significantly exceeds the specified word limit may be penalized | ||
| Pass Mark | 90%-100% | Excellent work showing flawless understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being fully prepared for study at Level 4. | Insightful and accurate interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, based on an excellent application of the most appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows full awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it | Insightful and effective use of a carefully selected range of relevant reading. Consistently accurate application of referencing. | Exemplary presentation of work that is fluent and flawless throughout. |
| 80%-89% | High quality work showing fluent understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being fully prepared for study at Level 4. | Excellent interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, employing highly appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows strong awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it | Consistent and balanced engagement with a refined selection of many types of relevant reading. Consistently accurate application of referencing. | Highly effective presentation of work that is coherently structured and clearly expressed throughout. | |
| 70% – 79% | Commendable work showing detailed understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being highly prepared for study at Level 4. | Effective interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, showing effective use of appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows well established awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it. | Consistent engagement with a wide range of relevant reading. Consistently accurate application of referencing. | Well-formed presentation of work that is coherently structured and clearly expressed throughout. | |
| 60% – 69% | Work of solid quality showing competent and consistent understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being well prepared for study at Level 4. | Good interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, using appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows sound awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it. | Engagement with a wide range of relevant reading. Sound application of referencing, with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies. | Competent presentation of work in terms of structure and clarity of expression. |
| 60% – 69% | Work of solid quality showing competent and consistent understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being well prepared for study at Level 4. | Good interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, using appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows sound awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it. | Engagement with a wide range of relevant reading. Sound application of referencing, with no inaccuracies or inconsistencies. | Competent presentation of work in terms of structure and clarity of expression. |
| Level 3 | Introductory knowledge | Cognitive and intellectual skills | Reading and referencing | Presentation, style and structure | |
| Pass mark | 50% – 59% | Adequate work showing understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being prepared for study at Level 4, but lacking depth and breadth. | Adequate interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, largely using appropriate skills, methods and procedures. Work shows awareness of the nature of the area of study and an emerging awareness of different perspectives or approaches within it. | Engagement with an appropriate range of reading beyond essential texts. Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies. | Work is structured in a largely coherent manner and is for the most part clearly expressed. |
| 40% – 49% | Simple factual approach showing understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), resulting in students being largely prepared for study at Level 4. Narrow or misguided selection of material, with elements missing or inaccurate. | A limited interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, showing emerging awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it, although not always logical or coherent and with inaccuracies. | Evidence of reading, largely confined to essential texts, but mainly reliant on taught elements. Referencing may show inaccuracies and/or inconsistencies. | Ordered presentation in which relevant ideas / concepts are reasonably expressed. | |
| Marginal fail | 35% – 39% | Work shows limited but fragmentary understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), for example through inaccuracies, inclusion of irrelevant material and/or absence of appropriate information. | Weak and at times flawed interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, resulting in largely descriptive work that shows lack of awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it. | Poor engagement with essential texts and no evidence of wider reading. Heavily reliant on taught elements. Inconsistent and weak use of referencing. | Work is loosely, and at times incoherently, structured, with information and ideas often poorly expressed. |
| Fail | 20% – 34% | Unsatisfactory work showing weak and flawed understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s), for example through serious inaccuracies, inclusion of a significant amount of irrelevant material and/or absence of appropriate information. | Very weak interpretation and evaluation of information and ideas, resulting in descriptive work that is often illogical, invalid or irrelevant. Little awareness of the nature of the area of study and no appreciation of different perspectives or approaches within it. | Limited evidence of reading and/or reliance on inappropriate sources. Limited engagement with taught elements. Very poor use of referencing. | Work is poorly presented in a disjointed and incoherent manner. Information and ideas are very poorly expressed, with weak English and/or inappropriate style. |
| < 20% | Highly unsatisfactory work showing major gaps in understanding of the basic underlying concepts and principles of the subject(s). Inclusion of largely irrelevant material, absence of appropriate information and significant inaccuracies. | Work is largely irrelevant or inaccurate, characterised by descriptive text and unsubstantiated generalisations. Minimal or no use of evidence to back up views, showing complete lack of awareness of the nature of the area of study and different perspectives or approaches within it. | No evidence of reading or engagement with taught elements. Absent or incoherent referencing. | Work is extremely disorganised, with much of the content confusingly expressed. Very poor English and/or very inappropriate style. |