Practice assignment – Intercultural Communication and Management 2021 – Annette Hoffskov

Feedback for group “William Steffensen et al”, class C: A very good paper – it would have been close to
perfect, had you not had some reference flaws. On a scale from A to C, the paper gets an A – but in
order to get the same “grade” at the exam, your reference work must be even more perfect (-;

What you did well What you can improve

Content, use of theoretical concepts
What we look for: Fine use + QA1 + 3: Well-written and well-
 Correct use of concepts presentation of the answered.
 Using the relevant concepts and concepts you
relevant parts of the syllabus apply. Part B: A very good and thorough
 Valid arguments discussion using relevant concepts. The
 Clear points and arguments Fine, broad use of concepts of LCC/HCC (Hall) could also
 A good analysis the syllabus. have been applied.
Sources and references
What we look for: Generally, good By the end of your first paragraph, you
 Placing a reference the first time reference work. miss out on a ref. for this: “Dimensions
you mention a theory, a concept, do not exist: A reply to Brendan
an author, a text Good that you put McSweeney”, (a year will do in this
 Making correct references (APA) in a ref. the first case, since you already mentioned
 Placing references correctly time you mention a author and name of text).
 Having a correctly structured list text / author etc.
of references And very good that A year is enough if you refer to the
you add page point/subject of an entire text. In all
numbers (at least other cases, you need a page number!
sometimes)! E.g. in the first paragraph of page. 2 (the
McSweeney and Hofstede ref.s).
A very fine list of
literature / And you must include a page number
bibliography when you quote! E.g.: “...does not write
a word about the validation of the
But >>> country differences in the IBM study
on other data” (Hofstede, 2002).
Language and meta communication
What we look for: Generally, a very In academic English, we do not contract
 Correct spelling and grammar good level of words: didn't should be did not.
 Clear and comprehensible English!
sentences Watch out for verb confusion, e.g. on
 Meta communication that guides Well-written. page 3: Nisbett & Masuda argues (>
the reader and helps make the argue).
structure and the arguments of
the paper clear A fine structure Page 5: Advantages and disadvantages
and use of meta would be more academic than pros and
communication. cons (-;

Only a few minor Page 6: Remember to add an

errors >>> apostrophe to make the genitive form
when the word/name ends in an S:
Trompenaars’ model