-326390-43942000Course Guides: Part B Course Detail
-326390-43942000Course Guides: Part B Course Detail
BUSM4522/4524
Name of Course: Executive Consulting
Teaching Period Semester 1, 2022
Course Title and Code BUSM4522
Campus City
Learning Mode F2F
Primary Learning Mode F2F
Teacher guided hours 36 hours
Learner directed hours 108 hours minimum
Course coordinator name: Dr. Panos PiperopoulosEmail: panos.piperopoulos@rmit.edu.au
Offering coordinator/Lecturer name: Dr. Panos PiperopoulosEmail: panos.piperopoulos@rmit.edu.au
Location: Graduate School of Business and Law, Cnr Victoria and Russell Sts, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000
Pre-requisite Courses and Assumed Knowledge and Capabilities
050974 - Design Thinking for Business Exec (BUSM4519/BUSM4520 or equivalent course code)045669 - Leading People & Organisations (BUSM4131/BUSM4132 or equivalent course code)040054 - Marketing (MKTG1276/MKTG1277 or equivalent course code)045668 - Accounting for Business Decisions (BUSM4126/MUSM4127 or equivalent course code)045671 - Financial Management (BUSM4141/BUSM4142 or equivalent course code)040057 - Creating Business Strategies (BUSM3922/BUSM3923 or equivalent course code)050941 - Managing Technology & Innovation Strategy (BUSM4528/BUSM4529 or equivalent course code)050939 - Managing Business Operations (BUSM4525/BUSM4526 or equivalent course code)
Course Description
In this course you will develop the knowledge and skills needed by executive leaders to design and research strategic project briefs to meet clients needs both internal and external to your organisation. You will also reflect on the progression of your career, identifying actions required to achieve your career goals as an executive and lifelong learner.This course includes a Work Integrated Learning experience. You will undertake and be assessed on structured activities that allow you to learn, apply and demonstrate your professional or vocational practice; and be involved in authentic engagement with partner organisations that include industry feedback.This course also provides you with a capstone experience, which will provide you with the opportunity to integrate, critically reflect on and consolidate what you have learnt in your program.
Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs)
On successful completion of this course you will be able to:
CLO1: Create a strategic project brief in an ethical sustainable manner using business design thinking to provide solutions and recommendations to a clients organisation.
CLO2: Apply interpersonal skills to work in teams and to communicate effectively with clients.
CLO3: Critically reflect on your executive career potential and lifelong learning.
Learning Activities
This course will be delivered f2f over 2 intensive weekends,
Sat 5th & Sun 6th of March (week 1),
Sat 19th & Sun 20th of March (week 3) and,
Saturday the 21st of May (week 11)
To get started, please review the Course orientation and 'Setting up for success' and academic writing skills modules on Canvas, then access the relevant topics/modules and reading materials as needed throughout the course.Please make sure tostay current on course news by checking the announcement and your emails. My contact details are available under the 'course orientation' tab, 'meet your tutor' and under the people tab on the left-hand side of Canvas menu.
This course will include small groups work to prepare you for the project brief and presentation. This course is aimed at increasing your critical abilities to read, understand and challenge situations to create a range of options for a client. The learning experiences will be through interactive dialogue (more workshop like), so please pre-read material and come prepared to participate, share views and professionally challenge each other and the course facilitator. Foundation resources are provided across a range of relevant topics to stimulate discussions during the intensive weekend workshops and you will need to find additional resources to support your assignment works. Expect to invest the equivalent to the time taken in a normal face-to-face course; i.e. 9-12 hours private study per week. You will need to keep your (and your teams) momentum going throughout the semester as the course requires you to manage your own time.
You will be working through various topics/ consulting themes during the first (week 1) 2-day intensive weekend, in addition to forming groups and selecting your client project (a short brief if available on Canvas). On the 2nd intensive weekend (week 3) the clients will present their challenge to the allocated team and work with them on Saturday the 9th or thereabouts depending on the clients availability as well. Collectively, clients will propose a range of challenges and we endeavour to offer opportunities across industry sectors and not for profits as much as we can in each semester. Success in this course will require you to develop a deep understanding of the topics and the client andincorporate your insights into a proposal to assist them to address the challenge, supportedwith relevant theory and practice (utilizing all your previous learning in the EMBA program and beyond) in your assignments. In doing so you will demonstrate you cancritically assess and interpret meaning from evidence on that topic and apply it to your clients requirements.
Support material is provided on each topic on Canvas. After the two intensive weekends you will be able to work/consult with your course facilitator on a 1-2-1(group) basis for the purposes of your project. Access to the client other than in the intensives will be clarified and may vary between clients but expect to meet them at least 2-3 times during the semester and in some cases many more.
Teaching Schedule
You are expected to demonstrate a high level of personal autonomy and accountability. It is pertinent that you complete the guided readings prior to the intensive weekend(s) to ensure that you attain the greatest learning from this course. It is recommended that you engage with the additional readings, and beyond. Links that take you directly to each article are provided on the course Canvas.
This course will be delivered as per the schedule outlined earlier over 2 intensive weekends (week 1, week 3, week 11) as per the plan below (subject to slight variations if/as needed):
Date Topic Recommended readings Assessment due
Intensive weekend 1 Session 1
March 05, 2022 Consulting: an introduction & skills preview Chapter 1: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback)
Intensive weekend 1 Session 2
March 05, 2022 The Consultants goals, assumptions and roles Chapter 2: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 1 Session 3
March 05, 2022 The Consulting meeting & the contract Chapter 4 & 5: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback)
Intensive weekend 1 Session 4
March 05, 2022 Dealing with low motivation & agonies of consulting Chapter 6: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 1 Session 5
March 05, 2022 Understanding & dealing with resistance Chapter 8 & 9: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Assessment 1: Individual
Due: 10th of ApriSubmit: Online
Intensive weekend 1 Session 6
March 06, 2022 Legal & ethical consulting Finkelman, J. & Lopez, P.D. (2012). Global consulting in a culturally diverse world: Ethical and legal implications, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 64(4): 307-324.
O Mahoney, J. (2011). Advisory anxieties: Ethical Individualisation in the UK consulting industry, Journal of Business Ethics, 104:101-113.
Allen, J. & Davis, D. (1993). Assessing some determinant effects of ethical consulting behaviour: The case of personal and professional values, Journal of Business Ethics, 12:449-458.
Exton Jr. W. (1982). Etchical and Moral Considerations and the Principle of Excellence in Management Consulting, Journal of Business Ethics, 1: 211-218.
Intensive weekend 1 Session 7
March 05, 2022 How to present the picture and prepare for the meeting Chapter 15: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 1 Session 8
March 05, 2022 Prepare for feedback Chapter 14: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 1 Session 9
March 05, 2022 Engagement, implementation of solutions Chapter 16 & 17: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 1 Session 10
March 05, 2022 Learning through consulting Chapter 19: Block, P. (2011).Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rdEdition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback) Intensive weekend 3 Session 11
May 21, 2022 Preparation for presentation to the client. N/A Assessment 2: Group Presentation
Due: 21st of May 2022
Submit: Online
Intensive weekend 3 Session 12
May 21, 2022 Write-up of the final deliverable report for the client firms. N/A Assessment 3: Group Report
Due: 11th of June 2022
Submit: Online
Overview of Learning Resources
Various learning resources are available online through HYPERLINK "http://my.rmit.edu.au/portal/" h myRMIT/Canvas. In addition to topic notes, assessment details and a study schedule, you may also be provided with links to relevant online information, readings, audio and video clips and communication tools to facilitate collaboration with your peers and to share information.
Resources are also available online through RMIT Library databases and other facilities. Visit theRMIT librarywebsite for further details. Assistance is availableonlinevia our chat and email services, face to face at ourcampus librariesor via the telephone on (03) 9925 2020.
Additional resources and/or sources to assist your learning will be identified by your course coordinator and will be made available to you as required during the teaching period.
Recommended Text
The recommended text for this course is:
Block, P. (2011). Flawless Consulting: a guide to getting your expertise used, 3rd Edition, Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA. ISBN: 978-0-470-62074-8 (hardback)
Online access via RMIT Lib here: https://primo-direct-apac.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1d27kpc/RMIT_ALMA51159831960001341
Furthermore, there are additional readings (mainly journal papers) uploaded on Canvas.
Additional Learning Resources
Furthermore, there are additional readings (mainly journal papers) uploaded on Canvas.
Overview of Assessment
The assessment tasks, their weighting and the course learning outcomes to which they are aligned are as follows:
Assessment Task 1:Individual Essay, 40%Linked CLOs: 3
Assessment Task 2:CLN presentation, 20%Linked CLOs: 2 & 3
Assessment Task 3:CLN Group report, 40%Linked CLOs: 1, 2 & 3
Feedback will be provided throughout the semester in class and/or in online forums through individual and group feedback on practical exercises and by individual consultation.
Assessment Tasks
This course has three assessment tasks, all of which must be completed. A total mark of 50% is required for a pass in the course. This does not mean that each individual component of assessment must be passed.
Overview of Assessments
Marks (%) Type of Assignment Due Date
Assignment 1 40% Individual Essay 10th of April 2022
Assignment 2 20% CLN Presentation 21st of May 2022
Assignment 3 40% CLN Report 11th of June 2022
Assessment Task 1: Individual Essay
Submission Date: 10th of April 2022
Marks Allocated: 40%
Learning Outcomes Assessed: CLO3
Purpose: Each student will choose a topic of relevance to consultancy (from the 10 topics covered in the course) to reflect on for his/her own practice.
Description: You are free to choose any topic you like.
Write an essay of 2,000 words (+/- 10%) on your nominated individual research topic. Your task is to define the topic and explain its relevance to the discipline of consultancy, reflect on its relevance to your own practices and critically analyse the topic. You do NOT need to defineother topics, but you can refer to them within the context and relevant flow of yourown topic.
Your research should draw on AT LEAST 8 articles from peer-reviewed academic journals and textbooks and 5 articles from other reliable sources (e.g. World bank datasets, Government reports, established media outlets, corporate documents etc). All source materials must be fully and consistently referenced as per RMITs guidelines and policies.
Marking criteria (detailed rubric on canvas): see Assignment 1 description on Canvas and grading criteria at the end of this document.
Submission: via TurnitIn on Canvas
Assessment Task 2: CLN (presentation)
Submission Date: 21st of May 2022
Marks Allocated: 20%
Learning Outcomes Assessed: CLO2, CLO3
Purpose: Your CLN (Collaborative Learning Network) team plays the role of a consultancy to deliver a range of options to address the challenge the clients present to you in a project brief. This assignment is the presentation of options and recommendations to the client (live) while the next assignment (number 3) is the formal (written) report to support the presentation with greater details.
Description:
Objective:Investigate the challenge presented from your clientorganisationand present a range of options they can adopt to address the issue or opportunity. Target three options with specific recommendations on how you suggest these be implemented (alternatives, in series or parallel). A general guide on approximate cost and ROI should accompany your presentation to assist decision-making (though these can be plausible estimates as accurate data may not be available within the semestertimeframe).
Role play:To make this learning experience as realistic as possible, your team are expected to play the role of a consultancyorganisationto present/discuss your recommendations to/with your client.
Presentation (facilitated dialogue): Your consulting team will share your recommendations to the client representatives with the view to excite them about opportunities they bring and engage them indialogueabout how to optimally implement them.The maximum total time allocated is 45 minutes which includes questions. It is strongly recommended that you engage with the client early in the presentation.
The presentation should explain the value to be created and why your recommendations address the challenge. Introduce your findings and explain how this series of recommendations fits the client business strategy (or extends it) in a way that adds value and enhances performance.You should expect challenging questions from the client, which you will need to answer in a way that provides confidence in your recommendations.You are managing the environment and the interactions from when you come the stage until you close off the meeting (for up to an additional 10 minutes).
Marking criteria (detailed rubric on canvas): see Assignment 2 description on Canvas and grading criteria at the end of this document.
Submission: via TurnitIn on Canvas
Assessment Task 3: CLN (Group Report)
Submission Date: 11th of June 2022
Marks Allocated: 40%
Learning Outcomes Assessed: CLO1, CLO2 & CLO3
Purpose: This assignment requires this group to write a formal5,000 word (+/-10%)business proposal highlighting 3-5 recommendations to address the client challenge.
Description: The consulting team should explain how these recommendations will generate a return on investment and enhance business performance (including both tangible and intangible benefits). Although written in business report format, the intention of this exercise is to link theory to practice, so standard referencing is required to enhance the robustness and credibility of the proposal. This challenge is set to demonstrate you can apply your EMBA capabilities to make a difference in a real situation (the mark of a competent professional and something desired by employers).
Marking criteria (detailed rubric on canvas): see Assignment 3 description on Canvas and grading criteria at the end of this document.
Submission: via TurnitIn on Canvas
Other Information
Assignment Submission Procedure
All written assignments must be submitted electronically through Turnitin (and, therefore, no Assignment Cover Sheet is required). Turnitin will assess your work in approximately one minute, and return a colour coded response for the originality of the text.
You must retain a copy of all work submitted for assessment until a final result for a course is formally released by the university.
Referencing Guide
You are required to adopt the RMIT-Harvard style of referencing, i.e., in text referencing and end of text reference list. All quotations and references should be properly sourced. Inadequate details of publications and other sources will reduce the assessed grade. Not adhering to the RMIT-Harvard referencing guides and academic-integrity/writing guidelines will lead to mark reductions and can also lead to disciplinary measures.
Students can consult the library referencing guides. There is also a dedicated module on the courses Canvas shell that provides you will all the information needed on how to approach an academic report/essay.
Seehttps://www.rmit.edu.au/library/study/referencingfor assistance.
In addition to these resources, RMIT provides academic skills support and resources through the Study and Learning Centre (https://www.dlsweb.rmit.edu.au/lsu/)and the library (http://www.rmit.edu.au/library).
All RMIT University policies on assessment apply.
Academic Integrity and Misconduct
Students demonstrate academic integrity in their assessment practices by:
engaging with assessment activities in an honest way;
providing accountability for the authorship and originality of work submitted;
acknowledging the work of others and the re-use of original work.
Academic misconduct is addressed in accordance with the Student conduct policy
Assessment involving research with human participants, their information or their tissue, or animal subjects is carried out in accordance with the Staff ethics and integrity policy.
For further information see the Academic Integrity website.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, ideas or creation of another person as though they are your own. It is a form of cheating and is a very serious academic offence that may lead to expulsion from the University. RMITs policy on plagiarism is available here:http://www.rmit.edu.au/students/academic-integrityExtensions and Special Consideration (Individual and Group Assessment)
Extensions:
Extensions are available for unforeseen circumstances of a short-term nature.
Applications must be submitted to the school at least one working day before the due date of the assessment.
Extensions can be approved for a maximum of one week (seven calendar days) past the due date for an assessment. (Where students need an extension exceeding one week they must instead apply for special consideration.)
Special consideration:
Special consideration is available for unexpected circumstances outside students control. These include but are not limited to: unexpected short-term ill health, and unavoidable family, work, cultural or religious commitments.
An application for special consideration is made in advance of an assessment wherever possible but will normally be accepted within five working days after the assessment date.
For more information, see the Special Consideration page of the RMIT website.
Penalties for Late Submission
All assignments will be marked as if submitted on time. Late submissions of assignments without special consideration or extension will be automatically penalised at a rate of 10% of the total marks available per day (or part of a day) late. For example, if an assignment is worth 20 marks and it is submitted 1 day late, a penalty of 10% or 2 marks will apply. This will be deducted from the assessed mark. Assignments will not be accepted if more than five days late, unless special consideration or an extension of time has been approved.
Changes to the Assessment Scheme
Where a change to assessment approved by the dean/head of school changes an assessment due date, students will be given at least five working days notice of the new due date.
Assessment Feedback
You can expect to receive marks and feedback on in-course assessment work in time to improve your performance in related assessment tasks later in the course.
You will normally receive marks and feedback on in-course assessment tasks within 10 working days of the deadline for submission of that work, or, where an extension has been granted, within 10 working days of agreed extended due date.
You will normally receive your marks for all in-course assessments before sitting any end-of-course exam.
Review and Appeal
A student may request a review of an assessment result or appeal a final course grade in accordance with the Conduct of assessment and appeals section of the Assessment processes.
Students are entitled to seek a review of their result for a course, or appeal against their final result in the course, where they provide evidence that at least one of the following grounds of review or appeal is present:
theres been an error in the calculation of the result, or
the assessment(s) didnt comply with the description of the assessment or the assessment criteria published in the course guide, or
the assessment(s) or the assessment criteria published in the course guide arent consistent with the requirements of the relevant training package or accredited course, or
the assessment didnt comply with the assessment policy or processes or another relevant rule or University policy (that is, theres been an error in process), and this had a significant impact on the result.
Where a student has evidence of at least one of the approved grounds, they must first ask the course coordinator/program manager responsible for the course to review the final grade for the course.
Students are recommended to request these reviews within five working days from the publication of the result, so they will still have time to appeal the result if necessary.
Where the course coordinator/program manager isnt available the student may ask the dean/head of school to review the result.
Grade Criteria
Unless otherwise advised by teaching staff, grades for written work will be awarded on the following basis: (for further details, please carefully read the assessment rubrics on the course Canvas)
Grade Description Points / % of points
High Distinction
(HD) High Distinction involves: exceptionally clear understanding of course matter and appreciation of issues; well organised, formulated and sustained arguments; well-thought out and structured diagrams; relevant literature referenced; and, evidence of creative insight and originality in terms of comprehension, application and analysis with at least some synthesis and evaluation. 80-100
Distinction
(DI) Distinction involves: strong grasp of course matter and appreciation of key issues, perhaps lacking a little on the finer points; clearly developed arguments; relevant and well-structured diagrams; appreciation of relevant literature; and, evidence of creative and solid work in terms of comprehension, application, analysis and perhaps some synthesis. 70-79
Credit
(CR)
Credit involves: competent understanding of course matter and appreciation of some of the main issues though possibly with some gaps; clearly developed arguments; relevant diagrams and literature use, perhaps with some gaps; well prepared and presented; and, solid evidence of comprehension and application with perhaps some analysis. 60-69
Pass
(PA) Pass involves: some appreciation of course matter and issues, work generally lacking in depth or breadth and with gaps. Often work of this grade comprises a simple factual description (i.e. basic comprehension) but little application or analysis. Work of this grade may be poorly prepared and presented. Investment of greater care and thought in organising and structuring work would be required to improve. 50-59
Fail
(NN) Fail involves evidence of lack of understanding of course (minimal or inadequate comprehension and little or no application) and inability to identify issues. Often inadequate in depth and breadth and sometimes incomplete or irrelevant. <50
Grading CLN/Oral Presentations:
Intended Learning Outcomes Level of attainment
Knowledge Development (content of presentation)HD DI CR PA NN
Awareness of functions relevant to the effective management of a consultancy venture including plans for delivering a contract/recommendation to the client 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
Awareness of standards, legislation and regulations and operations relevant to the clients needs 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
Skills Development (content of presentation) A demonstration of the development of consultancy acumen an understanding of and ability to fulfil consultancy needs. 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
A demonstration of problem solving skills critical, logical and creative thinking to develop ideas and practical solutions. 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
Presentation Skills Quality of preparation
Pacing of presentation
Effective use of visual material -whiteboard, visual aids, handouts (as appropriate)
Organisation/structure of material (intro; main body; conclusion)
Preparedness to answer questions 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
Quality of communication
Audibility, liveliness and clarity of presentation
Confidence and fluency
Appropriate use of body language (inc. eye contact)
Listening skills: responsiveness to audience 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 <50
Assessment Rubric/Criteria:
0 39 40 48*
Coverage
(range and understanding of sources; synthesis and focusing of ideas on the topic)
Limited range of ideas; shows weak acquaintance with sources; ideas unfocused. Evidence of reading in the field; identification of some pertinent issues; some superficiality in treatment of the topic.
Analysis
(organisation/coherence of argument; support through example/detail/ quotations/references/ experience; critical approach)
Disjointed organisation; unsupported arguments; little use of relevant experience; descriptive and without critical analysis. Appropriate organisation; some evidence of understanding of ideas and ability to relate ideas and experience; mainly descriptive with limited attempt at critical judgement.
Presentation
(length; use of academic conventions; spelling, grammar, paragraphing etc; layout; proof-reading)
Length requirements not observed; use of unattributed material; incomplete referencing; presentation consistently marred by language errors affecting comprehensibility; inadequate proof-reading. Length requirements observed; basic command of academic conventions; some errors in proof-reading and editing; presentation occasionally marred by language errors affecting comprehensibility.
Where appropriate:
Investigation /Research
(questions; rationale; theoretical background; data collection methods; critical analysis; implications) Where appropriate:
Research questions unclear; rationale weak; theoretical background very limited; research methods not well-chosen or misapplied; analysis sketchy or unjustified by data; implications asserted or untenable. Where appropriate:
Basic research questions; limited rationale; some theoretical background attempted; research methods adequate; analysis attempted but may lack depth; some implications examined.
The marking guidelines below indicate the quality of work expected for the award of a particular grade. Tutors will take these guidelines into account when grading submitted work. These are not minimum criteria which must be met in all respects in order to gain a particular grade, but are indicative of the general standard of work expected at each level. If the marker(s) of an assignment judge that unattributed material has been included, that the referencing is inadequate or that there has been inappropriate collusion by students on an individual assignment, such work will normally be awarded a grade in the range 0-39, i.e. a poor fail. Alternatively, the marker(s) may judge that there is a possibility that the offences of plagiarism or malpractice in university assessment have been committed and draw this to the attention of the School.
Assessment banding FAIL (pass mark 50)
* a mark of 49 is not used, a clear decision as to whether the work is a pass (mark 50) or a fail should be made
Assessment banding: PASS (50-59); CREDIT (60-69); DISTINCTION (70-79); HIGH DISTINCTION (80+)
50 -59 60 -69 70 - 79 80+*
Coverage
(range and understanding of sources; synthesis and focusing of ideas on the topic) Shows acquaintance with and understanding of key concepts and issues from a range of sources; ideas synthesised and related to the topic. Competent coverage of major sources; shows depth of understanding of the topic; relationships between ideas cogently made. Thorough coverage of sources; evidence of scholarship in understanding and synthesis of ideas. Comprehensive coverage of sources; evidence of extensive research and original thinking in understanding and synthesis of ideas; integration of materials from the programme and other sources.
Analysis
(organisation/coherence of argument; support through example/detail/ quotations/references/ experience; critical approach) Ideas organised and grouped into a coherent argument; use of examples / detail / quotations / references / experience to support argument; some critical analysis of ideas/ evidence; limited appraisal of implications. Critical review and synthesis of ideas; coherent, realistic and well-supported argument; insightful use of personal ideas and experience; perceptive appraisal of implications. Systematic critical questioning of received ideas and suggestion of alternative perspectives; thorough, well-supported analysis; insightful evaluation and discussion of implications. Systematic critical analysis of received ideas and creative consideration of alternative perspectives; well-supported in-depth analysis; insightful evaluation and discussion; clear evidence of reflection; excellent use of examples.
Presentation
(length; use of academic conventions; spelling, grammar, paragraphing etc; layout; proof-reading)
Length requirements observed; appropriate use of academic conventions; accurate spelling, grammar etc.; careful proof-reading. Competent control of length; skilled use of academic conventions; almost all errors eliminated in proof-reading. Concise and effectively argued, within the length allowed; skilled use of academic conventions; accurate proof-reading.
Exceptionally clearly and cogently argued within the constraints imposed by the word limits; skilled use of academic conventions; accurate proof-reading.
* 80+marks should be awarded for answers which are exceptionally good for Masters level students. In addition to meeting all the descriptors for the 70-79 category answers should excel in one or more of the four areas described, i.e. Coverage; Analysis; Presentation.
Academic policies and procedures
RMIT Assessment & Assessment Flexibility Policy
RMIT Assessment Processes
Assessment Rubric/Criteria:
0 39 40 48*
Coverage
(range and understanding of sources; synthesis and focusing of ideas on the topic)
Limited range of ideas; shows weak acquaintance with sources; ideas unfocused. Evidence of reading in the field; identification of some pertinent issues; some superficiality in treatment of the topic.
Analysis
(organisation/coherence of argument; support through example/detail/ quotations/references/ experience; critical approach)
Disjointed organisation; unsupported arguments; little use of relevant experience; descriptive and without critical analysis. Appropriate organisation; some evidence of understanding of ideas and ability to relate ideas and experience; mainly descriptive with limited attempt at critical judgement.
Presentation
(length; use of academic conventions; spelling, grammar, paragraphing etc; layout; proof-reading)
Length requirements not observed; use of unattributed material; incomplete referencing; presentation consistently marred by language errors affecting comprehensibility; inadequate proof-reading. Length requirements observed; basic command of academic conventions; some errors in proof-reading and editing; presentation occasionally marred by language errors affecting comprehensibility.
Where appropriate:
Investigation /Research
(questions; rationale; theoretical background; data collection methods; critical analysis; implications) Where appropriate:
Research questions unclear; rationale weak; theoretical background very limited; research methods not well-chosen or misapplied; analysis sketchy or unjustified by data; implications asserted or untenable. Where appropriate:
Basic research questions; limited rationale; some theoretical background attempted; research methods adequate; analysis attempted but may lack depth; some implications examined.
The marking guidelines below indicate the quality of work expected for the award of a particular grade. Tutors will take these guidelines into account when grading submitted work. These are not minimum criteria which must be met in all respects in order to gain a particular grade, but are indicative of the general standard of work expected at each level. If the marker(s) of an assignment judge that unattributed material has been included, that the referencing is inadequate or that there has been inappropriate collusion by students on an individual assignment, such work will normally be awarded a grade in the range 0-39, i.e. a poor fail. Alternatively, the marker(s) may judge that there is a possibility that the offences of plagiarism or malpractice in university assessment have been committed and draw this to the attention of the School.
Assessment banding FAIL (pass mark 50)
* a mark of 49 is not used, a clear decision as to whether the work is a pass (mark 50) or a fail should be made
Assessment banding: PASS (50-59); CREDIT (60-69); DISTINCTION (70-79); HIGH DISTINCTION (80+)
50 -59 60 -69 70 - 79 80+*
Coverage
(range and understanding of sources; synthesis and focusing of ideas on the topic) Shows acquaintance with and understanding of key concepts and issues from a range of sources; ideas synthesised and related to the topic. Competent coverage of major sources; shows depth of understanding of the topic; relationships between ideas cogently made. Thorough coverage of sources; evidence of scholarship in understanding and synthesis of ideas. Comprehensive coverage of sources; evidence of extensive research and original thinking in understanding and synthesis of ideas; integration of materials from the programme and other sources.
Analysis
(organisation/coherence of argument; support through example/detail/ quotations/references/ experience; critical approach) Ideas organised and grouped into a coherent argument; use of examples / detail / quotations / references / experience to support argument; some critical analysis of ideas/ evidence; limited appraisal of implications. Critical review and synthesis of ideas; coherent, realistic and well-supported argument; insightful use of personal ideas and experience; perceptive appraisal of implications. Systematic critical questioning of received ideas and suggestion of alternative perspectives; thorough, well-supported analysis; insightful evaluation and discussion of implications. Systematic critical analysis of received ideas and creative consideration of alternative perspectives; well-supported in-depth analysis; insightful evaluation and discussion; clear evidence of reflection; excellent use of examples.
Presentation
(length; use of academic conventions; spelling, grammar, paragraphing etc; layout; proof-reading)
Length requirements observed; appropriate use of academic conventions; accurate spelling, grammar etc.; careful proof-reading. Competent control of length; skilled use of academic conventions; almost all errors eliminated in proof-reading. Concise and effectively argued, within the length allowed; skilled use of academic conventions; accurate proof-reading.
Exceptionally clearly and cogently argued within the constraints imposed by the word limits; skilled use of academic conventions; accurate proof-reading.
* 80+marks should be awarded for answers which are exceptionally good for Masters level students. In addition to meeting all the descriptors for the 70-79 category answers should excel in one or more of the four areas described, i.e. Coverage; Analysis; Presentation.
