MIP 601

Exit Specialism

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION

Assessment Type: Practical Project and supporting documentation 

Assessment Component: 1 of 2 and 2 of 2 

Practical Project: 75% 

Assessment Weighting:
Supporting Documentation: 25% 

Due Date: Tuesday the 27th of April at 3pm 

Method of Assessment: Digital Canvas Submission 

THE BRIEF

This module aims to enable students to consolidate the specialist skills and knowledge gained during the 
course of their studies at ACM. Students may choose to submit various forms of practical work (part 1) 
for assessment such as a live performance, creative portfolio of recordings, or a business proposal, 
however, all projects regardless of format must be approved by your module tutor no later than the third 
week of teaching. 
 
You are required to submit 

● Practical Project  
● Supporting Documentation  
 
Part 1: Practical Project (Part 1 of 2)  
 
You are required to create a practical project demonstrating your chosen specialism.  
The practical submission must demonstrate an advanced understanding of the skills and specialist 
knowledge required to create an industry standard product, publication or public presentation. 
 
Examples of Project Choices. Students may choose projects outside of their pathway specialisms 
following tutor approval. Areas may include, but are not limited to:  
 ● Live Music Performance/Live stream/IGTV/Youtube (​12-20mins/3-4 songs) 
● Live Production 
● Portfolio/EP Submission (​12-15mins/3-4 songs) 
● Live Recording 
● Multimedia Project 
● Studio Production 
● Product 
● Business Proposal  
● Industry Guide 
● App 
● Analytical Tool
 
Before commencing work on the Exit Specialism project, students must present a draft project proposal in 
class or seminar for approval. 
 
Students will be responsible for the planning, organisation and realisation of the project. Students may 
collaborate with others from their discipline, across pathways, from other ACM student cohorts, ACM 
Alumni or externals as appropriate. If collaboration forms an integral part of the submission, supporting 
documentation must clarify the roles and responsibilities of each collaborator.   
 

Part 2: Supporting documentation (Part 2 of 2) 

Students must submit supporting documentation that explains the project and the student’s contribution 
towards it. This should include critical analysis of the project planning that you have undertaken through 
the professional preparation and delivery of the music related project. This should take the form of a 
written commentary (1500 words) which outlines, in detail, the steps taken throughout the developmental 
stages of the project. 
 
The documentation should clearly demonstrate that the student has an advanced understanding of their 
subject specialism and the ability to release a new body of work while effectively managing the demands 
of the project and time constraints . Students may choose to submit an appendix that contains a Gantt 
chart, email threads, photograph/sketches, notes and other evidence showing project development. 
 
The supportive commentary must contain quotations from a range of sources. Include a Reference List 
and a Bibliography. 
 
 Students also have the option of submitting an additional analytical self-filmed or audio presentation 
(up to 10 minutes) detailing how you would improve the professional standard of your project, taking 
into account Industry standards, rationale, utilisation of various industry roles, technical knowledge, 
creativity, innovation and project management.  

ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE

● Do not submit work 5 minutes before the deadline as your project files will be large and may take a
long time to upload. In previous years, students have experienced a 2 hour upload time.
● The submission timestamp is taken from the point that your upload is complete, not the point that
you press the submit button
● When submitting files using a Google Drive link you must ensure you follow the correct procedure
and set access permissions to ‘anyone with the link can view…’
● It is your responsibility to ensure any video and audio are clear on the submitted recordings, and
that files are accessible to/viewable by the assessor.
● Do not submit written work in .pages format. This work may not be marked due to accessibility
concerns. You should submit as Google Doc/Word/PDF format 

LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT CRITERIA WEIGHTING

Demonstrate professional  Evidence that extensive planning has 

understanding in the preparation and  been undertaken that enables students 
LO1  10%
delivery of an advanced music related  to realise a professional body of work. 
project.  

The ability to solve problems using a  Produce a commentary which evidences 

LO2 
range of ideas and techniques.   problem solving and critical 
self-analysis in the creation of a 
Critical self-analysis and the ability to  15%
professional project. Provide a thorough 
LO3  evaluate project material   critical self-analysis within a project 
evaluation in the commentary. 

Extended technical facility and specialist 

LO4 
knowledge 
Develop and realise a project suitable 
The ability to conceive and assemble a  for publication or public presentation 
performance, presentation or portfolio,  75% 
that demonstrates specialist 
LO5  supporting notes and visual aids at a  knowledge. 
standard suitable for publication or 
public presentation 
 ASSESSMENT POLICIES

● By submitting your assignment through Canvas you are confirming that:

o I declare that the work I am submitting is my own work, and that contributions from other sources are
fully acknowledged.
o I declare that I have read ACM’s Academic Integrity Policy.
o I declare that I am aware of the Academic Skills services available via ACM Digital Library.

● Students are required to keep a copy of all work submitted within their Google Drive, in case of accidental loss of
the original/s.

● One copy of the work must be submitted via Canvas before the due date.

● All document files should be named appropriately using the Course Code, Assignment Name and Submission
Date, for example:
o MIP-999 Assignment 1 Part A - 12022018 or,
o ACM-S123 Assignment 5 - 150921

● All additional materials accompanying the work must be clearly marked with the Course Code, the assignment
name and submission date.

● All submissions must be fully functional, including accessibility for all ACM Staff to Google Drive links. ​See ‘How
To’ videos on Canvas for step by step guides on how to correctly share your files via Google Drive.

● All sources used must be referenced as per ACM referencing guidelines. Where work has not been fully
referenced, the work will be subject to ACM’s Academic Integrity Policy.

● Written work over or under 10% of the specified word count will be penalised.

● Level 5 and Level 6 work submitted after the due date will be subject to penalty and capped at 40%.

● Title page, table of contents, footnotes, bibliography, endnotes and appendices are not included in the overall
word count.

● Pages should be kept in order and numbered.

● Submission timestamps are taken from the point that the upload is complete and not the point that you click the
submit button.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY: GENERIC DEGREE MARKING RUBRIC

20 Point
Class % GUIDE DESCRIPTORS
Scale

Class 1 1 95 -100 Excellent. Wholly successful work in almost every respect.

In all modules this is reserved for work that is memorable for its
2 87 – 94 excellence. Grade 1 work is outstanding (virtually faultless).

3 79 - 86

4 70 - 78

Class 2 Div.1 5 69 Very good standard. An adventurous approach that the student can
support with strong technique and/or appropriate subject
6 66 - 68 knowledge. Performance work reveals only occasional minor errors.
The performer and composer demonstrate a reasonably mature
7 63 - 65 level of comprehension on appropriate stylistic interpretation.
Composition shows a skilled and imaginative approach and is
8 60 - 62 contextualised intelligently and successfully within the brief. Written
work is presented to a fairly high standard and all argument and
discourse within written work reveal reasonably comprehensive
background reading, and intelligent thought leading to illuminating
work. Written examination reveals no significant gaps in key
knowledge requirements.

Class 2 Div. 2 9 59 Reasonably good standard. Imaginative response with a good grasp
of the crucial aspects involved. Occasional errors of judgement.
10 56 - 58 Practical work is executed to a more than satisfactory standard with
a good level of technical proficiency. Errors, though present, are
11 53 - 55 fairly infrequent and minor, and the performer demonstrates some
sensitivity to the appropriate performance aspects of a given piece.
12 50 - 52 Written and project work is generally solid and reveals an intelligent
and perceptive approach. There are no serious omissions, and
reasonably effective use of language enhances the work. Written
examination reveals occasional gaps in key knowledge
requirements, but a sound understanding of most main principles.
 Class 3 13 48 - 49 Acceptable standard. Appropriate response to assignment with a
(Pass) fair grasp of the crucial aspects involved. Some errors of judgement.
14 45 - 47 Performance demonstrates a workmanlike approach achieving a
“safe” but not necessarily inspired result. Inaccuracies and mistakes
15 42 - 44 are present but the performer recovers from these with minimal
disruption to the performance piece. The performer or composer
16 40 - 41 may not necessarily demonstrate a mature awareness or sensitivity
to the requirements of the style of the piece. Written and project
work follows most details listed on the brief, and omissions -
although present - are not serious. Presentation and use of English
are of an acceptable standard. Answers are coherent and
informative, with some omissions of the central material. Written
examination reveals gaps in the knowledge requirements, but a
satisfactory understanding of most key principles. Grade 16 (40%)
work is only just worthy of a pass – and contains a few serious
flaws.

Fail 17 35-39 Not quite of satisfactory standard. Terms of the brief are partly
(Compensated) fulfilled but shortcomings are sufficiently serious to prevent the pass
mark from being reached. In practical work errors and
miscalculations are exposed with a fair degree of frequency. The
errors mentioned in the next lowest category (Grade 18) are still in
evidence but occur with less frequency, but are still significant
enough to prevent the attainment of a pass grade. Written work
demonstrates a partially successful attempt to fulfill the brief with
several omissions. Written work may be poorly presented with
inaccurate or inappropriate use of English and/or illogical essay
structure. Written examination reveals significant gaps in key
knowledge requirements.

Fail 18 30-34 Inadequate response to brief. Many errors and weaknesses.

(Compensated) Practical work highlights one or more of the following: serious
technical deficiency, serious and fundamental lack of understanding
of solo/ensemble performance responsibilities. Composition and
project work highlights one or more of the following: inappropriate
response to brief, incomplete work, lack of appropriate preparation,
poor presentation and/or use of English, essay structure illogical.
Written examination highlights a serious lack of appropriate
knowledge requirements.

Fail 19 1–29 Completely inadequate response to assignment. Does not fulfill the
brief. Work highlights serious technical deficiencies. Practical work
is inadequate and full of mistakes and inaccuracies. Serious and
fundamental misunderstandings of the music or project aims are
revealed. Appropriate preparation is entirely lacking. Use of English
is very poor. Essay structure wholly illogical. Brief may have been
ignored or almost wholly misunderstood.

Fail 20 0 Incomplete or no work submitted.