Get Best Dissertation Writing Help For BUS9711M At Affordable Prices !!

1

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Lincoln International Business School (LIBS)

LIBS Vision:

To provide an innovative, scholarly learning environment based on a commitment to  responsible management practices and a global community mind-set.

LIBS Mission:

To develop socially responsible leaders ready to meet the challenges of 21st century  business.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Details

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Code: BUS9711M-2

Credit Rating: 45

Level: M

Subject: Business

Pre-requisites: None

Co-requisites: None

Barred Combinations: None

Department: Department of Management

Module Lead: Dr Charlotte Smith

Teaching Team: Various supervisors

External Examiner: Various depending on programme

Contact Details

Module Co-ordinator: Dr Charlotte Smith [email protected]

Admin Support: [email protected]

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Introduction

The Professional Inquiry Project allows students to demonstrate their mastery of  management within the field of their degree. It is an individual and independent project in  which students can bring together and apply their learning from the programme to help to  solve a chosen business problem or challenge, a real-world issue or a research topic.  Through bringing together learning from across their degree programme, students will  demonstrate their accumulated knowledge and understanding of management within their  field and its application to organisations, through synoptic assessment.

This module seeks to enable and facilitate innovation and creativity in terms of project foci,  form and output. Rather than being prescriptive, students are required to not only  undertake an in-depth study of a topic related to the title of the degree but also to take  responsibility for their own learning and negotiate the form and output of the final project.  The choice of topic and format of the final assessment will be negotiated with the tutor,  which will ensure mutuality of intent, process, practice and format of assessment. Although  the foci and form of the final project are to be negotiated, the following are indicative of the  potential formats students may choose: work-based project, client-based project; or other  negotiated project such as the design of a new enterprise. Students will be responsible for  finding an organisation and negotiating access where necessary with regard to client based projects.

Completing the Professional Inquiry Project gives you a unique opportunity to undertake  an extended piece of personal research on a topic of your own choosing. By undertaking  the project students will be demonstrating their ability to research and critically analyse  and integrate complex information necessary in the world of contemporary management.

Learning Outcomes

On completion of the module you should be able to:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

LO3 Select, collect, analyse and interpret evidence from multiple sources in accordance with sound principles of research and investigation.

LO4 Synthesise and critically evaluate different sources of knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent argumentation.

LO5 Critically evaluate and apply theoretical and methodological approaches in ways which augment understanding of the topic.

LO6 Propose practical resolutions via conclusions and recommendations when appropriate.

LO7 Reflect critically on their own research practice and intellectual argument particularly in the context of contemporary debates in management.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Transferable Skills

In addition to the specific learning outcomes detailed above, the module also facilitates the  development of a number of transferable skills; these are skills which will contribute to your  own personal development as a ‘scholar’, but also in the world of work. These can be  identified as:

• Problem solving and critical analysis: analysing facts and circumstances to  determine the cause of a problem and identifying and selecting appropriate  solutions.

• Research: the ability to analyse and evaluate a range of business data, sources  of information and appropriate methodologies, which includes the need for  strong digital literacy, and to use that research for evidence-based decision making. Conceptual and critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

• Self-management: a readiness to accept responsibility and flexibility, to be  resilient, self-starting and appropriately assertive, to plan, organise and manage  time.

• Self reflection: self-analysis and an awareness/sensitivity to diversity in terms of  people and cultures. This includes a continuing appetite for development.

Principles of Responsible Management Education

Lincoln International Business School is a member of PRME (Principles of Responsible  Management Education) and seeks to engage its students in critical debate about the  implications of sustainability for the global business community and management practice.  To that end, students are encouraged to integrate these principles into their research  practice and reflect on the implications of PRME for their own work.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Delivery

The module will be delivered primarily through individual supervision, but there will be an  initial programme of academic skills lectures and research methods lectures to start the  process of independent study. The full schedule of activity is available in Appendix 1.

Key Dates

• 6th September 2023- Deadline for completing the research topic survey (needed to  allocate you to a supervisor with expertise in your chosen area)

• 20th September 2023- By this date, you will be allocated to a supervisor for your  final project and you should contact them to arrange your first meeting

• 8th November 2023- Deadline for project proposal (10% of your mark)

• By the end of November 2023 (at the latest)- submit your LEAS ethical approval  form (including supporting materials)

• 30th January 2024- Deadline for final project

Contact Time

There will be a series of online lectures and up to 6 hours of supervision.

Directed Study

Students will be allocated an individual supervisor, who will advise and facilitate the  process of independent study. Preferred supervisors cannot be guaranteed.

Independent Study

Students are expected to invest approximately 450 hours of time into their Professional  Inquiry Project. Most of this will be through independent study. You are expected to  articulate your research focus and develop key research questions to guide your  investigation. Supervisors will advise but will not direct the study.

Module Delivery

Total Hours

Lectures/workshops

24

Supervision (max.)

Independent Study (nominal) Nominal Total (CATS)

6

420

450 (45)

.

Assessment Summary

The module will be assessed through a portfolio comprising several interrelated elements.  The initial project proposal will be a maximum of 1000 words. Students will be required to  maintain an online supervision log used to monitor, gauge and feedback on student  progress. The final project submission will be a maximum of 11,000 words, submitted as  a single piece of written work. The final grade will be allocated either as a weighted average

of the two assessments or based on the final written submission (final project), whichever  is the higher.

In summary:

• Project Proposal (10%) – LO1, LO2

• Final Written Submission (90%) LO1- LO7

Full assessment details are available in Appendix 3.

Assessment Method

Weighting

(%)

LOs Assessed

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Project Proposal

10

X

X

Final Project

90

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Formative Assessments

Students will receive formative feedback through regular supervision meetings with their  allocated supervisors. The Project Proposal will be assessed against assessment criteria, and students are expected to obtain feedback through supervisory meetings.

Assessment Criteria

Assessment Criteria Grids will be used to provide feedback on Blackboard and indicate  how marks will be allocated. These can be found in Appendix 2.

Avoiding Plagiarism

The University Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s  thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own. Examples of plagiarism include the  unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form.  Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of dishonest  means in assessment. Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of  the procedures and penalties involved. Plagiarism is, however, easily avoided by the full  and correct use of referencing.

When available, always check your ‘similarity’ rating index on Turnitin submissions to  ensure you percentage rating is in the ‘green’. Please note however, that such a rating is  indicative only and tutors will consider other evidence in assessing the academic integrity  of your work. Where there are doubts about your work, you may be called in for an  interview.

In submitting your work for assessment, in accordance with the University Regulations,  you are certifying that this is entirely your own work without input from either commercial  or non-commercial writers or editors, or advanced technologies such as Artificial  Intelligence services, beyond that permitted by the proof-reading policy. You also confirm  all sources have been correctly attributed or referenced. You may be required to evidence  that the work submitted is indeed your own, through making available drafts and data to  any integrity investigation.

Should such misconduct in assessment be detected prior to or following the final  examination board, then the penalties imposed could be severe; including the revoking of  any degree awarded. Academic offence proceedings initiated by the University may delay  graduation and/or extend beyond the time frame of an academic year.

Recording your Supervisor Meetings

Once a month you must meet with your supervisor to discuss your progress.

If you do not complete a form for a particular month then the PGT admin team will send you a reminder to complete the form. If a form is still not submitted then you may be invited to an attendance panel meeting and, if you have a Tier 4 Visa, your visa may be at risk.

Below is the link to the Supervision Record online form which you need to complete once a month to evidence your engagement with the final project process. All students need to complete the form (both Home and International students).

Here is the link you need:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=xEculd4FgkKDr19LRrFij4KpavX L2V9Hgoadw4QyfxJUOU9VNEtIWEMxREZHM0ZYUk9FVFY0SERDSi4u

You need to complete the online form every month in order to be able to submit the final project.

The University’s Student Engagement and Participation Policy states that students need to engage during the final project period as well as during the timetabled sessions.

Please remember: If you hold a Tier 4 visa and do not submit the online form each month to show your engagement then you are breaching the terms of your visa.

Returning Home

If you have a Tier 4 visa and wish to return home to work on your final project, you need to ask for your supervisor’s approval and then complete a Change of Circumstances form and Tier 4 will review the request. You must not return home until the absence has been authorised. The change form can be accessed via the link below and you need to select the category of ‘change of research location’.

Learning Resources

Reading

The key text(s) for this module are:

Chatfield, T. (2018) Critical Thinking: Your Guide to Effective Argument, Successful  Analysis & Independent Study. London: Sage.

Cottrell, S. (2017) Critical Thinking Skills: Effective Analysis, Argument and Reflection.  London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P.R. and Jaspersen, L.J. (2018) Management  and Business Research, London: Sage.

Gray, D.E. (2020) Doing Research in the Business World. London: Sage.

Moore, S., Neville, C., Murphy, M. and Connolly, C. (2010) The Ultimate Study Skills  Handbook. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Other more specific references will be signposted in class. You are also expected to read  independently for this module. This module requires that you follow the Harvard System of referencing.

Recorded webinars

Recorded webinar: Good academic practice at the University of Lincoln Recorded webinar: Finding information: successful searching

Recorded webinar: Resources for academic study

Recorded webinar: Accessing library resources and effective internet searching Recorded webinar: Evaluating information: is it CRAAP?

Recorded webinar: Acting on feedback

Recorded webinar: Getting organised and avoiding procrastination

10

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

The Library (www.library.lincoln.ac.uk)

Our Subject Librarians are Martin Osborne and Daren Mansfield. They can assist you  to use the catalogue, do subject searches and so on. Contact details are:

Martin Osborne’s contact details:

Work telephone: (01522) 886316

Email: [email protected]

Room: University Library

Daren Mansfield’s contact details:

Work telephone: (01522) 886094

Email: [email protected]

Room: University Library

If you cannot find Martin Osborne or Daren Mansfield, any of the subject librarians will help  you.

Digital Learning Resources (https://digitaleducation.lincoln.ac.uk/resources-hub/) In addition to the above it is recommended you make use of the digital learning  resources to support your learning on this module:

12

Research Ethics

The University requires that all those carrying out research engage with the University’s  commitment to conduct research to high ethical standards; understand the reasons for,  and participate fully in, the ethical review process; and fulfil their moral and legal  responsibilities in respect of the rights and welfare of participants.

Click here to download your Ethics Handbook.

Click here to download the Research Ethics Policy.

The conduct of students must always be overseen by their supervisor, who takes  responsibility for ensuring that the Code of Practice for Research and all relevant policies  and procedures are followed.

Please read the research code of practice.

The University of Lincoln is committed to ensuring that its research activities  involving human participants and personal data are conducted in a way which:

• respects the dignity, rights and welfare of all participants in research; • minimises risk to participants, researchers and third parties;

• appropriately manages personal data;

• aims to maximise the public benefit of research.

Types of Research

Research is broadly viewed as ‘that involving humans’ and ‘that not involving humans’. Research not involving humans

No ethical clearance is required for any research that is:

• Desk or library based

• Reviews of existing publicly available data

• Systemic reviews of literature.

Research involving humans

For all other research designs, you will complete an individual application using the Lincoln  Ethics Application System (LEAS).

You will need to liaise with your academic supervisor to complete the application before  requesting the academic supervisor’s authorisation. Once your supervisor is happy that  you have addressed all their comments, they will sign the form and you can then request  authorisation from the second marker for a review of your application.

The second marker will only electronically sign the form when they are happy with it,  otherwise they will add comments and reject the authorisation request, prompting you to  reflect further upon their concerns.

Please note that you may be required to make amendments before your application  receives a favourable outcome. The review process can take around four weeks and, in

exceptional circumstances, may take longer. Therefore, it is important to invest sufficient  time and energy into completing your application, as this will ultimately delay the progress  of your project since no data collection can commence until you have ethical approval for  your research.

Please watch this short training video before you begin your application. Navigating LEAS – YouTube

You can also find a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) here.

Supporting Documents

To complete an individual application to LEAS you will need:

• Any participant information sheets

• Any questionnaire /interview questions and schedule

• Any schedule for focus groups of other data collection approaches • Have considered the risks and data management of your proposed work  (generic guides are available to help you complete the risk assessment) • Have considered where your research fits within existing body of literature and  developed an outline methodology before you commence your application. • Have considered the language used in your data collection instruments with  your participants.

• Evidence of organisational approval for the research (see below).

These supporting documents and information must be submitted with your LEAS  application, otherwise it will be rejected.

You cannot therefore undertake a successful LEAS application before you have reviewed  the literature and considered your methodology.

Please note you may only use approved questionnaire services. Currently, this is MS  Forms, JISC or onlinesurveys.ac.uk (where the University will create an account for you).  You should contact [email protected] directly to set up your account.

Templates

There are approved University of Lincoln templates that you can adapt to suit your project  (e.g., participant information sheet, consent form etc.) You can find these templates here.

Organisational Approval

Students conducting research in their own organisations need to submit evidence of  organisational approval for their research. As long as it is not the NHS (there is a separate  pathway for NHS research), then simply attaching a copy of an email or letter within the  documents section of LEAS that states that the organisation knows about the research  and is happy for it to take place will be sufficient in the vast majority of cases. There may  be an issue in local government or social care organisations if they have their own internal  research governance system in place, but you will usually be signposted to that internally.  Please discuss this with your supervisor if you are unsure.

An example for context: A student doing research in their organisation, Tesco, would like  to interview or give staff at the branch a questionnaire. In this instance, a short note from  their manager would be sufficient, unless the organisation has an internal approval process  (or it is the NHS).

LEAS Review Process

The outcome of an application to LEAS will be either:

o A favourable opinion – to support the work and allow it to proceed o An unfavourable opinion – whereby queries have been raised you need to address  in your application.

This video shows you how to edit your application based on reviewer comments:  Responding to reviewer comments – YouTube.

If your proposed research involves any aspect of a special human characteristic (such as  working with children) then your LEAS application is reviewed by a committee in LIBS prior  to a decision being taken. This will take more time to approve. Where this is the case, LIBS  will allocate reviewers for projects that are vulnerable groups or sensitive topics (the  second supervisor signature will not be available for those projects).

Please ensure you allow enough time between submission of an application and the  intended start of your data collection. The review process can take around four weeks and,  in exceptional circumstances, may take longer.

Remember you must not start to collect any primary data until you have received an  email confirming your application has been given a favourable ethical opinion.

Final projects based on primary data that are submitted without ethical approval  may be subject to an academic offence investigation and/or attract a fail mark.

Appendix 1: Schedule of Activity

Week

w/c

Lecture 1

Academic Skills Lecture

Lecture 2

Research Methods Lecture

Reading

All available through the Online Reading List

35

29/05/23

Introduction to the module and business  and management research

Generating ideas for research &

Reviewing the literature

Gray (2020) Chapter 3 &

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 2

36

05/06/23

The philosophy of business and

management research

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 3

37

12/06/23

Navigating the library services

Research design: qualitative, quantitative,  and mixed methods

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 4

38

19/06/23

Research ethics

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 5

39

26/06/23

Harvard referencing &

Presentation and academic conventions

Qualitative research approaches:  interviews, focus groups and secondary  data &

Qualitative research approaches:  observational and visual methods

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 6 & 7

40

03/07/23

Management and analysis of qualitative  data &

Writing up research findings

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 8 & 12

41

10/07/23

Quantitative methods: survey design and  secondary data

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 9

42

17/07/23

Tour of SPSS statistics software

Gray (2020) Chapter 23

43

24/07/23

Statistical analysis of quantitative data

Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapters 10 & 11

End of taught sessions and beginning of independent study

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Appendix 2a: Assessment Grid: Project Proposal

Clarity 12%

Excellent (5)

Good (4)

Satisfactory (3)

Fair – with risk of  failure (2)

Poor – needs

significant

improvement (1)

Not

Evidenced  (0)

Is the focus of the project  clear and suitable? Is  there a central aim and  related objectives? Is the  focus suitable for the  degree title?

Excellent Clarity

Aims and objectives clearly  expressed but would

benefit from further

improvement/tightening

Aims and objectives apparent  and workable, but some further  clarification required

General aim

apparent but are  insufficient to

provide the

guidance or

structure required

General aims weekly  identified but need

further refinement and  objectives need to be  articulated

appropriately

Not

Evidenced

Rationale 20%

What is the justification  for and relevance of the  topic in terms of

academic literature,

contemporary business  practice and/or enterprise  development? Is there  scope for critical thinking  and originality/creativity?

Excellent

Rationale – clear  and concise

Rationale fundamentally  sound, but would benefit  from further

thought/stronger argument  in some areas

Rationale as outlined is

generally relevant but lacks  originality and/or scope for  creativity/criticality. The

rationale needs to be

clearer/stronger in some

respects; to enable the work to  make appropriate

recommendations/develop  stronger conclusions

Rationale is weak  and arguments

need strengthening  in several important  respects if the work  is to meet a pass

standard

Rationale

unclear/inconsistent.  The argument

insufficiently supported  and lacks

clarity/relevancy

Not

Evidenced

Suitability 20%

Is the approach to the  problem or project

sound? Are the potential  sources of evidence

identified and to what  extent can this material  be assembled? Have  sources of evidence been  evaluated? Are the

sources/subject

accessible?

Excellent – clear  relationship

between

aims/objectives  and chosen

approach. If

followed through  competently the  work should

address all aims  and objectives

The approach is generally  suitable and, if carried out  competently should enable  the general aims and most

of the objectives to be met.  There are some minor  concerns/potential

improvements required

Approach being taken is

broadly appropriate. However,  there are some doubts about  some aspects and further work  is needed in several important  respects. However, there is  confidence that the approach  should enable the work to  succeed

There are

significant doubts  about the suitability  of the approach

being

taken/proposed.  Unless the issues  are addressed then  the work is unlikely  to meet the

standard expected

Methods/Sources are  either inappropriate or  ill defined. Unless the  approach is

changed/further

developed, the work is  likely to fail

Not

Evidenced

References 12%

Is the scope and  extent of the

literature

understood? Have  the key sources  been identified an  accessed? Are the  citations correct?

Excellent –

precise and

appropriate with  no obvious

limitations

The references/sources are  broadly and specifically

appropriate to the purpose of  the research. If used well they  should enable the work to  reach a high standard. Some  minor additions/adjustments  are needed to improve the  potential

The evidence presented  confirms that the sources  are broadly sufficient and  accessible. Further work is  needed to either identify  more focused

material/sources and/or  broaden the evidence base.  If used appropriately, the  evidence base is sufficient  to enable the work to reach  a pass standard

Basic sources

identified but

further sources are  needed to scope  the study. Unless  the sources are

developed, the

work is unlikely to  pass

References

inappropriate/insufficient,  further literature search

needed. As it stands the  evidence base is insufficient  to enable the work to pass

Not

Evidenced

Structure 12%

Is the proposed  structure logical  and consistent

with the aims and  objectives?

Excellent – no

further

improvements  required

The proposed structure is  consistent with the proposed  approach and follows

conventions. There are only  minor improvements needed

The proposed structure of  the work is consistent with  the general principles of  research. If the work was  presented in the manner  suggested it would be likely  to meet a pass standard.  However, the proposed  structure could be

enhanced in some key  respects

Structure needs  more work and

unless

improvements are  made the final

output is unlikely to  pass

Structure flawed in several  respects and unless these  issues are resolved, the work is highly likely to fail

Not

Evidenced

Schedule 12%

Is the proposed  structure of final  output

appropriate? Is

the schedule fully  outlined and

agreed with the  supervisor? Is the  schedule clear

and achievable?

Excellent – the  schedule has

built in

contingency and  is highly likely to  succeed

The schedule is clear and  logical. However, there are  some minor concerns and/or  limited evidence of

contingency planning

The workflow is generally  clear and milestones

appropriate. The schedule  may be ambiguous in part  and have limited

contingency; or be

inconsistent with some of  the supervisor’s

expectations. However, if  all goes according to plan,  the work has a high

probability of being

completed on time

More work needed  to clarify workflow  and milestones,

and more

importantly, the

work is at risk of  failing to meet the  deadline

Schedule flawed in several  respects and the work is  highly unlikely to be

completed satisfactorily

unless these are resolved

Not

Evidenced

18

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Ethics 12%

Is the proposal  ethically

responsible and  consistent with  the values of

LIBS?

Fully articulated  and all

dilemmas

appropriately

resolved

Generally well-articulated and no  significant issues unresolved. There  may be some minor issues

associated with presentation and  argumentation, but fundamental  ethical issues have been dealt with.  The work can proceed, and the  relevant ethical approval can be  signed off

Generally sufficient to  enable the work to

proceed, but some

minor matters may still  need resolving.

Formal ethical

approval is likely, and  no significant issues  exist

Some ethical dilemmas  either need further

articulation or resolutions  needed before the

research can proceed.  Ethical approval cannot  be granted at this stage  for a variety of reasons

Limited awareness of  ethical principles and/or  principles of responsible  management education.  The research can’t

proceed further until these  issues are addressed

Not

Evidenced

Appendix 2b: Assessment Grid: Final Project

Assessment Criteria

Exceptional

80+

Excellent

70-79

Good

60-69

Satisfactory

50-59

Fair with significant  weaknesses

40-49

Poor with

fundamental

weakness

Less than 40

Communication

Communicates effectively the  aims, objectives and relevance  of the research project. (LO1)

The work is

exceptionally well  communicated and  goes well beyond  the expectations of  this level

Excellent with few  significant errors

Aims and Objectives  well communicated with  only minor issues. The  relevance of the work is  clear, but some aspects  may require some

further elaboration

Aims and objectives are stated  and sufficiently clear but may  require further refinement. The  general relevance of the work  is understood but not

necessarily fully articulated in  the context of the study

Aims and objectives are

apparent but may not be

sufficiently coherent or logical.  The broader relevance of the  work may not be understood or  weakly articulated

The aims and objectives  remain vague and the  work suffers from a lack  of focus or clear sense of  direction. The broader  relevance is not

considered or articulated

Management

Reflects a well devised and  executed adaptable plan, which  was actively managed so as to  achieve project objectives (LO2)

The student has

demonstrated

exceptional

management of the  project, well

exceeding that

required at this level

The work was well  planned, actively

managed and fully  achieved the

objectives

The work was planned  and managed so as to  achieve most objectives

The project was managed  satisfactorily but not

necessarily in an active

manner. Some issues may not  have been sufficiently

addressed

There were significant

weaknesses at a number of  stages that were addressed to  varying degrees but significantly  some remained unresolved

The project suffered from  significant weaknesses at  many stages and there  was limited evidence that  these were either

understood or addressed

Method

Selected, collected, analysed and interpreted evidence from  multiple sources in accordance  with sound principles of

research and investigation.  (LO3)

The execution is

virtually flawless and  demonstrates

competence beyond  the level of study

The work draws

upon an extensive  range of sources

and uses these

effectively following  sound principles of  research and

investigation

The work draws upon a  wide range of sources  and uses these

appropriately following  the main principles of  research and

investigation. There will  be minor omissions or  insufficient triangulation  or cross-referencing

The work draws upon sufficient  source material to substantiate  argument. However, further  data could have been collected  and/or analysed to provide a  fuller and more balanced

investigation. The work has  followed the basic principles of  investigation

Although the work has collected  and analysed evidence the  sources need enhancing and  the interpretation is deficient in  some ways. The work has not  consistently followed the key  principles of research design

There is insufficient

evidence and the

analysis lacks

sophistication with

virtually no interpretation.  Key principles of

investigation have not  been followed

Synthesis

Synthesised and critically

evaluated different sources of  knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent

argumentation (LO4)

The work is

exceptional, and the  powers of criticality  and synthesis go

well beyond the

standards expected  at this level

The work

demonstrates

criticality and powers  of syntheses. The  argumentation is

logical and coherent.  There are strong

arguments of

advocacy as well as  discovery

The work does

synthesise to a large  extent and critically

evaluate key sources of  knowledge. This is

robust but not fully

developed. The

argument is coherent  and evidenced, but with  a stronger emphasis on  discovery than advocacy

The work tends to summarise  quite extensively what is known  about the topic rather than  integrating the various sources  into a more coherent and

logical argument. The

evidence base is sufficient but  needed to be better deployed.  Argumentation is emergent  rather than developed

The work tends to present a  summary of a somewhat

constrained knowledge set.  There may be some critical  comments, but these are not  evaluative. Arguments are  under-developed

The work is a summary of  a limited knowledge

base. There is a limited  basis from which to

develop either synthesis  or evaluation. No

argumentation is

evidenced

Evaluation

Critically evaluated and applied  appropriate theoretical and  methodological approaches in  ways which augmented

The work is

exceptional and

extends our

knowledge in a

manner which goes  well beyond

The work is

appropriately

situated, critically

evaluates and

applies existing

frameworks and

The key conceptual,

theoretical and

methodological

frameworks are

reviewed and applied to  the specific topic/project

The work identifies and outlines  appropriate approaches but,  does not assess their relative  merits nor build an evaluation  of their utility to the aims of the  project

Although the work identifies and  reviews key approaches, there  are significant gaps. The focus  is on accessible material rather

than that which challenges  convention

There is limited

engagement with

conceptual,

methodological or

theoretical approaches  that could inform the

understanding 
of the topic  (LO5)

expectation at this  level

knowledge domains  in a manner that

demonstrates a

sophisticated

understanding and  capacity to augment  current knowledge

There is some critical  evaluation of these

frameworks

work. There is insufficient  engagement with

contemporary

approaches, controversy  or debate

Reflection

Critically reflected on the

research practice and

intellectual arguments

underpinning the work,

particularly in the context of  contemporary debates in

management or business. (LO6)

The work is

exceptional and

exceeds the level of  reflexivity normally  expected at this

level.

The work is

reflective and

evaluates its

contribution within  the context of wider  debates, whether

academic or in terms  of entrepreneurial,  business and

management praxis.  The work

demonstrates

justifiable self

confidence

The work is confident  and demonstrates a

sound understanding of  the limitations of the

research conducted and  can position the findings  within the contexts of  wider debates.

Positionality may not be fully analysed

The work focuses on outlining  strengths and limitations

without necessarily engaging in  critical reflection. Some

reflection is applied to the work  undertaken; there may be a  lack of confidence or over  confidence in the project. The  work doesn’t explore all the  lessons learnt

There is no critical reflection,  rather there is a focus on some  strengths and limitations. The

reflection tends to be broad  rather than applied to the

specificities of the individual  project

The work identifies some  issues, but these

represent a partial

reflection on research  practice. There is very  little engagement with  wider debates around  business and

management practice

Conclusions

Proposed practical and

appropriate resolutions via  conclusions and

recommendation, so as to  demonstrate the benefit of the  work undertaken. (LO7)

The work is

exceptionally

insightful in terms of  how the implications  and relevancy of the  work are understood and articulated

The work proposes  fully appropriate and  practical resolutions  via conclusions and

recommendations,  so as to

demonstrate the

benefit of the work  undertaken

The work reaches valid  conclusions and makes  relevant

recommendations. The  full implications of the  work may not be

articulated completely  but what is proposed is  evidence based

The work reaches an overall  conclusion but lacks specific  and/or considered

recommendations or practical  resolutions. Not all

recommendations follow from  the evidence

The conclusions are weakly  articulated and limited. Where  recommendations are made, they may not reflect evidence or  be practical. The work does  provide sufficient basis for more  robust conclusions

The conclusion tends to  be summative rather than  integrative. The nature of

the findings is not fully  appreciated or

understood in the context  of existing debates or  business and

management practice

Knowledge

Demonstrated a depth of

knowledge, expertise and

critical understanding of their  chosen topic area. (LO8)

The work

demonstrates

exceptional

knowledge and

critical

understanding such  that it goes well

beyond the

standards expected  at this level

The work

demonstrates in

depth knowledge,  expertise and critical  understanding of

chosen topic. The  work is authoritative  and contains original  insights

The work demonstrates  a sound knowledge and  developing level of

expertise in the field.  There is evidence of

some critical

understanding of key  areas, but this could be  further developed. There  are no significant gaps  in the knowledge base,  but originality is limited

The work demonstrates a

sufficient knowledge and

understanding of the

fundamentals of the topic or  domain. The work tends to  lack critical insight and

expertise is emergent rather  than developed

The level of knowledge and  understanding is not quite at the  level expected. Expertise is  limited and derivative rather  than original

There is evidence that  some knowledge has  been accumulated but

this is very limited and  there are significant gaps  and fundamental

weaknesses or

misunderstandings

Presentation

Presentation and organisation  of the project.

The work is

exceptionally well  presented, and the  organisation

exceeds that

expected at this

level

The work fully

complies with

presentation

guidelines and

conventions

Overall, the presentation  is of a high standard but  with a few minor

amendments required to  bring it up to full

compliance

The presentation meets the  pass standard but contains a  number of errors and deviation  from the guidelines and

conventions

The work is not quite up to the  standard expected. There are  numerous errors- whilst these

detract from the text they could  have been easily rectified by re working or editing the work

There are significant

weaknesses in

presentation and the

work does not really meet  expectations and falls  short of convention in  several important

respects. These errors  would require significant  reworking of the text

Levels of Achievement

Core Competency

Proficient

exceptional

Proficient

distinction

Proficient merit

Proficient pass

Not yet proficient

Not proficient

Non-weighted 0%

Synthesis

Synthesise information to contribute  original insight tocontemporary  challenges and domains (AoL CC8)

Integrates relevant  and sufficient

information to

address the

challenge or

domain, gathered  from multiple and

varied sources In

addition to typical  sources, finds

unusual ways or

places to get

information

Promotes divergent  or creative

perspectives.

Integrates relevant  and sufficient

information to

address the

challenge or

domain, gathered  from multiple and

varied sources In

addition to typical

sources, finds

unusual ways or

places to get

information

Promotes divergent  or creative

perspectives.

Integrates relevant and  sufficient information to  address the challenge or  domain, gathered from  multiple and varied

sources In addition to  typical sources, finds  unusual ways or places  to get information

Promotes divergent or  creative perspectives.

Integrates relevant and

sufficient information to

address the challenge or

domain Finds one or two

sources that are not typical  Offers new ideas but stays  within narrow perspectives

Does not integrate information  to address the challenge or  domain Gathers too little, too  much, or irrelevant information,  or from too few sources Does  not offer any new ideas.

Insufficient information,  weakly organised and  descriptive.

Appendix 3a: Assessment Brief: Project Proposal

Module Code & Title: BUS9711M Professional Inquiry Project

Contribution to Final Module Mark: 10%

Description of Assessment Task and Purpose:

The first assessment on this module is a 1,000-word project proposal, presented using the  template provided on Blackboard.

The purpose of this assessment is to assess the relevance and feasibility of your proposed  project. The introduction and literature review sections should demonstrate your  understanding of the existing knowledge base and the methodology section should be as  detailed as possible at this stage.

Learning Outcomes Assessed:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

Knowledge & Skills Assessed:

Knowledge and Understanding: topical issues in business and management informed by  contemporary organisation (PO5)

Subject-Specific Intellectual Skills: assess and solve complex and unpredictable problems  and make decisions based on identifying and evaluating appropriate alternatives (PO11)

Subject-Specific Practical Skills: effectively use information and communication  technologies relevant to the Management discipline (PO15); ability to evaluate, integrate  and apply theory, practice and reflection in an ethical and responsible way (PO16); acquire,  evaluate and synthesise a range of information for diverse organisational purposes  including new situations (PO17)

Transferable Skills and Attributes: plan and implement projects in an autonomous and  independent manner, and take responsibility for acquiring new knowledge and skills  (PO23).

Assessment Submission Instructions:

You are required to submit your assessment before 12 noon on 8th November 2023 using  the Turnitin submission point on the Blackboard module site. Pay careful attention to  instructions provided at the time of submission.

Late submission, where an extension has not already been granted, will attract penalties  at the level stipulated in the University Regulations (i.e. a reduction of 10 percentage points  for each whole or partial working day late)

Date for Return of Feedback: The expected date to return grades and feedback is 29th November 2023.

Format for Assessment:

You must use the template provided on Blackboard.

The Project Proposal is limited to 1,000 words. The word count includes everything in  the main body of the text (including tables, citations, quotes etc.) It does not include your  reference list or Gantt chart. Headings included in the provided proposal template are also  excluded from the word count.

The word count should be clearly stated on the first page of the assignment. Please note  that the word limit for this assignment is an absolute maximum. Misrepresentation of word  counts in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage in assessment may be referred as an  academic offence.

Students should be aware that the marker will not include any work after the maximum  word limit has been reached within the allocation of marks. Students may therefore be  penalised for a failure to be concise and for failing to conclude their work within the word  limit specified. Likewise, a failure to meet the maximum word limit may result in lower  marks based on the quality of the work because they may not have included the necessary  information required for the assessment and met the intended learning outcomes.

Please follow these formatting guidelines:

– Font / Size: Arial / 12

– Spacing / Sides: 1.5 / Single Sided

– Page numbers required? Yes

– Margins: At least 2.54 to left and right and text ‘justified’

– Referencing: Full compliance with Harvard protocols

Marking Criteria for Assessment:

Please see Assessment Criteria Grid in Appendix 2a.

Please note that all work is assessed according to the University of Lincoln  Management of Assessment Policy and that marks awarded are provisional on  Examination Board decisions (which take place at the end of the Academic Year.

Feedback Format:

Grades and written feedback will be available electronically on Blackboard. If you have  any specific questions relating to the feedback comments, please email your supervisor to  discuss.

Additional Information for Completion of Assessment:

• Please ensure that you use the proposal template provided on Blackboard.

• Your work should discuss the potential ethical dilemmas posed by your research  and identify how it connects with the principles of responsible management  education (PRME).

• Your proposal must include a Gantt Chart indicating your schedule of work and  agreed meeting calendar with your supervisor.

• Ensure all sources referenced in your assessment are correctly listed according to  the Harvard System of referencing.

• Include only sources that you have cited in the work. If you consult any sources  which you have not cited, they should be listed in a Bibliography.

• It is very important to use appropriate academic books/e-books and journals/e journals as the basis for your research.

• Whilst you may use the internet, take great care to ensure that the sites are valid  and appropriate for academic purposes. Sites such as Wikipedia,  Businessballs.com, MindTools.com etc. are inappropriate for academic research.

Assessment Support Information:

Learning Resources which will support this assessment include:

Postgraduate Study Skills: Managing the Dissertation Process

Important Information on Dishonesty & Plagiarism:

University of Lincoln Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s  thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own…Examples of plagiarism include the  unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form.  Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work’.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of academic  dishonesty. Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of the  procedures and penalties involved.

For further information, see plagiarism.org

Appendix 3b: Assessment Brief: Final Project

Module Code & Title: BUS9711M Professional Inquiry Project

Contribution to Final Module Mark: 90%

Description of Assessment Task and Purpose:

You should undertake an extended piece of personal research on a topic of your own  choosing. The length of this work should be a maximum of 11,000 words.

The choice of topic and format of the final assessment will be negotiated with your  supervisor. Example formats include dissertation, work-based project, client-based  project; or other negotiated project such as the design of a new enterprise.

This is an individual and independent project in which requires you to demonstrate your  ability to research and critically analyse and integrate complex information necessary in  the world of contemporary management. You will be supervised by a member of staff who  will provide support and guidance, make useful suggestions and offer reassurance, but not  give instructions on what to do. You are responsible for effectively managing your  individual project to meet the learning outcomes of the module.

Learning Outcomes Assessed:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

LO3 Select, collect, analyse and interpret evidence from multiple sources in accordance with sound principles of research and investigation.

LO4 Synthesise and critically evaluate different sources of knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent argumentation.

LO5 Critically evaluate and apply theoretical and methodological approaches in ways which augment understanding of the topic.

LO6 Propose practical resolutions via conclusions and recommendations when appropriate.

LO7 Reflect critically on their own research practice and intellectual argument particularly in the context of contemporary debates in management.

Knowledge & Skills Assessed:

Knowledge and Understanding: topical issues in business and management informed by  contemporary organisation (PO5)

Subject-Specific Intellectual Skills: assess and solve complex and unpredictable problems  and make decisions based on identifying and evaluating appropriate alternatives (PO11)

Subject-Specific Practical Skills: effectively use information and communication  technologies relevant to the Management discipline (PO15); ability to evaluate, integrate  and apply theory, practice and reflection in an ethical and responsible way (PO16); acquire,

26

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

evaluate and synthesise a range of information for diverse organisational purposes  including new situations (PO17)

Transferable Skills and Attributes: plan and implement projects in an autonomous and  independent manner, and take responsibility for acquiring new knowledge and skills  (PO23).

Assessment Submission Instructions:

You are required to submit your Final Project before 12 noon on 30th January 2024 using  the Turnitin submission point on the Blackboard module site. Pay careful attention to  instructions provided at the time of submission.

Late submission, where an extension has not already been granted, will attract penalties  at the level stipulated in the University Regulations (i.e. a reduction of 10 percentage points  for each whole or partial working day late).

Date for Return of Feedback: The expected date to return grades and feedback is after  the final Board of Examiners.

Format for Assessment:

The Final Project is limited to 11,000 words. The word count includes everything in the  main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes etc). It does not  include your reference list.

The word count should be clearly stated on the first page of the assignment. Please note  that the word limit for this assignment is an absolute maximum. Misrepresentation of word  counts in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage in assessment may be referred as an  academic offence.

Students should be aware that the marker will not include any work after the maximum  word limit has been reached within the allocation of marks. Students may therefore be  penalised for a failure to be concise and for failing to conclude their work within the word  limit specified. Likewise, a failure to meet the maximum word limit may result in lower  marks based on the quality of the work because they may not have included the necessary  information required for the assessment and met the intended learning outcomes.

Please follow these formatting guidelines:

– Font / Size: Arial / 12

– Spacing / Sides: 1.5 / Single Sided

– Page numbers required? Yes

– Margins: At least 2.54 to left and right and text ‘justified’

– Referencing: Full compliance with Harvard protocols

Marking Criteria for Assessment:

Please see Assessment Criteria Grid in Appendix 2b.

Please note that all work is assessed according to the University of Lincoln  Management of Assessment Policy and that marks awarded are provisional on  Examination Board decisions (which take place at the end of the Academic Year. Feedback Format:

Grades and written feedback will be available electronically on Blackboard. If you have  any specific questions relating to the feedback comments, please email your supervisor to  discuss.

Additional Information for Completion of Assessment:

• Ensure all sources referenced in your assessment are correctly listed according to  the Harvard System of referencing.

• Include only sources that you have cited in the work. If you consult any sources  which you have not cited, they should be listed in a Bibliography.

• It is very important to use appropriate academic books/e-books and journals/e journals as the basis for your research.

• Whilst you may use the internet, take great care to ensure that the sites are valid  and appropriate for academic purposes. Sites such as Wikipedia,  Businessballs.com, MindTools.com etc. are inappropriate for academic research.

Assessment Support Information:

Learning Resources which will support this assessment include:

Research and Dissertations

Introduction to Postgraduate Study Skills

Postgraduate Study Skills: Being Critical at Master’s Level

Postgraduate Study Skills: Managing the Dissertation Process

Postgraduate Study Skills: Academic Writing and the Research Process Postgraduate Study Skills: In-depth Critical Literature Review

Postgraduate Study Skills: Reading Critically

Harvard Referencing

Important Information on Dishonesty & Plagiarism:

University of Lincoln Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s  thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own…Examples of plagiarism include the  unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form.  Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work’.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of academic  dishonesty. Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of the  procedures and penalties involved.

For further information, see plagiarism.org

30