You are on page 1of 8

Cardiff Metropolitan University

MODULE TITLE:

Research Methodologies

PROGRAMME:

MBA

SEMESTER:

3

TERM:

April - July 2015

LECTURER SETTING ASSESSMENT: Roger Telfer
DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED:

t.b.a.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Assessment Type: Assignment (100% of the weighting for the module)


Task 1 (50%)
Task 2 (50%)

Research Design Proposal
Literature/ Evidence Review

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Indicative Assessment Requirements for the Module:
Maximum Word Limit and wordage for each aspect within the assignment:
The overall limit for the assignment is 4,000 words, with the Research Design
Proposal limited to 2000 words and the Literature/Evidence Review also limited to
2000 words.
A generic marking scheme and the assessment form are included later in this
document.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Description of Assessment Requirements
You are required to create a proposal for a research project aimed at solving a
business related problem or opportunity. This will necessarily include both a
research design and a literature review and evidence review, fully referenced, on
your research proposal.
The work is to be handed in as ONE entity via Turnitin.

1

It should include a critical evaluation of relevant theoretical and practical references and include breadth of understanding and depth of critical evaluation. Reviews will require analysis and evaluation of evidence and sources and be informed by theory and appropriate practice. Data collection methods must be selected and described which are consistent with the research philosophy necessary for its completion: these will include secondary and primary data sources. Task 2 The Literature/Evidence Review (50%) The research proposal must also include a Literature/Evidence review which evaluates the context for your research and sources academic research and models that are relevant to the project. The methods by which the data you collect will be analyzed need to be justified. Harvard style of referencing should be used 2 . Finally. Business Development Plan or Dissertation topics can be used if desired but it is not mandatory Discussion and debate on the above mentioned topics should be seen. will have the information that enables you to solve the problem or capitalise on the opportunity that is the aim of your research. validity and reliability issues relevant to the research must be discussed and a time plan for its completion must be calculated and displayed as a Gantt chart (or another suitable format). when you successfully complete them. There must be sufficient linkage between theory and practice. NOTE     A Case Study.Guidelines for undertaking the Assignment The assignment consists of ONE piece of coursework made up of two tasks. You must evaluate and fully describe the research methods that will be necessary to successfully complete the research. ethical. why you wish to carry out this research and the benefits that will accrue from its successful conclusion. Task 1 The Research Design Proposal (50%) The research proposal must include a background which describes the basic situation underlying your project. You must create research objectives that. It must include a statement of the problem or opportunity that is the aim of your project. It must describe the rationale for your project.

Guidance to the contents and recommended structure of the Proposal is shown below: (Note that Ref: applies to the Assessment Form included in this document. critique. seminal works. Section 2 Is there a clear structure? Does the review have a logical progression? Does the review convey the critical thinking of the writer? Is their good use of secondary sources. references. Section 1 Is the domain explained? Is there an identification of the main sources to be used? Is there a pointer to the upcoming structure? Section 2 The Main Body of the LR (1550 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2. Section1 Ref: Assessment Form Is the overall context for the research well established? Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective? Is there a statement of the problem? Is there a rationale for the topic? Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched? Do the boundaries of the research make sense? Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research? Are research objectives included and are they specific? Are the research questions well-conceived? Are the research objectives matched to the research questions? Part 2: Literature Review (2000 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2 Section 1 The LR Introduction (200 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2. citation. Section 3 Is there a clear concluding statement? Is there a clear implication for further research? Are research questions specified? Are there emergent themes? Is a conceptual framework established? Part 3: Research Methodology (1100 words) 1. models? Is the current position conveyed? Section 3 Conclusion (250 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2. chronology.) Part 1: Introduction and Background (400 words) Task 1. Section 2 3 Ref: Assessment Form. synthesis. Task .

or other research models. Comprehend and critically evaluate the differentiation between qualitative and quantitative methods as they are used in research design and evaluate the appropriateness of their application. including the formation of hypotheses. Identify the underlying principles of various analytical methods commonly applied in business and management research. and the definitions and nature of. Select appropriate analytical techniques according to the nature of the research. or creation of data for interpretation and data analysis. use. and be able to plan for (a) the selection. Learning Outcomes: Upon successful completion of this module students will be able to:         Formulate research questions and describe and critically evaluate differing research methods. The quality of the work. interpret and manipulate data. and (b) critically analyse. and be able to effectively demonstrate skills in. Integrate and plan key research activities and schedules including the setting of timetables and research objectives. primary and secondary data. and the acceptance of accountability for all aspects of the conduct of a research project Understand the importance of. and (c) synthesis results and interpretation of data and form conclusions. Critically appraise the importance of. Section Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the literature and the research questions? Have analysis methods been specified? Are ethical issues considered? Are validity and reliability issues discussed? Is there an adequate time plan for the research? Have academic protocols for referencing been met? Note that the suggested number of words should only be an approximate guide. the conventions which are required for the carrying out of a major research project including the design of experimental and non-experimental research projects. or paradigms and justify the selection and use of specific research methodologies. not the quantity is the factor which needs to guide the writing of the proposal. and value in differing aspects of business functions and requirements. collection. Assimilate and review an appropriate range of literature sources and other appropriate sources/evidential materials.Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal? Is the underlying philosophical approach adequately explained? Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task? Have the data types been defined and classified? Have target populations and samples been defined and justified? Part 4: Data Analysis (500 words) 3 Ref: Assessment Form. 4 . the preparation of an integrated research proposal and effectively manage the design and delivery of this. Task 1.

UNDERSTANDING & SYNTHESIS Are ideas summarized rather than being reproduced. numeric. proposal or argument? No examples No/limited/ inappropria te examples Few examples Uneven examples Good examples Vague assertions about issues. Vague assertions/ Poor explanatio ns. Good. verbal and literary form to a variety of audiences using appropriate business language. Good reading. Full critical assessment 5 . No evidence of reading. unrelated material Some mention of the issue. No use of theory – not even hinted at implicitly. etc in a given scenario.49 Barely answers the question – just reproduce s what knows about the topic No evidence of reading. effective summaries of theory. and analyse and evaluate the data produced (quantitative/qualitative or other) GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA MARK 29 or less 30 . Largely descriptive with no identificati on and analysis of central issues. Does it critically No evaluation. Some interconnections. Limited insight into issues. Long winded descriptio ns of theory. detailed analysis. Some good observations . An implicit hint at some knowledge of theory. APPLICATION Does it show appropriate use of theory in a practical situation? ANALYSIS Does it identify the key issues. Some quotations. etc. random. and are they inter-related with other ideas? No theory included. terminology.  Compute descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS. Comprehensiv e range of issues identified and discussed fully. Be able to communicate effectively in. Excellent range of examples. CONTENT: Has the question been answered? Vague.39 40 . 50 . and concepts including Construct questionnaires. Well chosen theories. Good interconnections. EVALUATION & RECS. but a collection of disparate points TOPIC KNOWLEDGE Is there evidence of having read widely and use of appropriate and up to date material to make a case? No evidence of reading. but stand alone. Excellent choice and threading of quotations into argument. Very basic theories mentioned but not developed or well used. Good use of quotations that flow with narrative. Good range of theories included. Good summary of theory.59 60 – 69 70 + Some looseness/ digressions Well focused Highly focused Some reading evident. Some long winded sections. but confined to core texts. evaluate their reliability. Uncritical acceptance Some evaluation Good interpretatio Good critical assessment. Good counterpoising of a range of perspectives. Excellent reading. Succinct.

Excellent argument. but weak. Some but limited sophisticatio n in argument. REFERENCING Thorough and accurate citation and referencing No referencing No referencing Limited/po or referencin g Some inconsistenci es in referencing Appropriate referencing Appropriate referencing PRESENTATION Logical and coherent structure to argument and effective presentation No structure apparent.assess material? Are there workable and imaginative solutions? of material. Acceptabl e. Reasonabl e presentati on. n. Poor structure. Poor presentation . Well presented material. Very effective presentation format. Reasonable structure. Independent thought displayed. Good presentation . Poor presentatio n. Little insight. and substantial individual insight. Good argument. but uneven structure. RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES ASSESSMENT Assessment Form Student Name: Student id: Task/Topi c Task 1 Section 1 Introduct ion and Backgrou nd Task 1 Research Design Proposal Marks Is the overall context for the research well established? Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective? Is there a statement of the problem? Is there a rationale for the topic? Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched? Do the boundaries of the research make sense? Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research? Are research objectives included and are they specific? Are the research questions wellconceived? Are the research objectives matched to the research questions? /12 6 Comments .

so there is a clear understanding of the value added? Topic Task 2 Section 1 The LR Introduct ion Task 2 Section 2 The Main Body of the Literatur e Review Task 2 Literature/Evidence Review Introduction /7 Is the domain explained? Is there an identification of the main sources to be used? Is there a pointer to the upcoming structure? Is there a clear structure? Does the review have a logical progression? Does the review convey the critical thinking of the writer? Is their good use of secondary sources. citation.Task 1 Section 2 The Research Design Proposal Task 1 Section 3 Plan of analysis. chronology. and models? Is the current position conveyed? 7 /35 . Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal? Is the underlying philosophical approach adequately explained? Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task? Have the data types been defined and classified? Have target populations and samples been defined and justified? Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the literature and the research questions? Have analysis methods been specified? Are ethical issues considered? Are validity and reliability issues discussed? Is there an adequate time plan for the research? Have academic protocols for referencing been met? /25 /13 Are the intended outcomes for the research made known. synthesis. etc. critique. seminal works. references.

Task 2 Section 3 The LR Conclusio n Is there a clear concluding statement? Is there a clear implication for further research? Are research questions specified? Are there emergent themes? Is a conceptual framework established? TOTAL /8 /100 General comments + strengths/weaknesses/areas for improvement: 1st Marker: Date: 8 .