Global Logistics and International Trade ISC7008
- Subject Code :
ISC7008
- University :
Cardiff Metropolitan University Exam Question Bank is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university.
- Country :
India
Assessment Brief
Module Code |
Module Title |
ISC7008 |
Global Logistics and International Trade |
Academic Year |
Semester |
2024-25 |
Two |
Module Leader email |
|
mhagha@cardiffmet.ac.uk |
|
Content
Who can answer questions about my assessment?. 7
Assessment Details
Assessment title |
Abr. |
Weighting |
WRIT1 Individual Coursework (Main) |
WRIT1 |
40% |
Pass marks are 40% for undergraduate work and 50% for postgraduate work unless stated otherwise. |
||
Task/assessment brief: Global trade complexities that influence international logistics |
|
Discuss the complexities of global trade that influence the international logistics landscape. How do political, economic, and cultural factors shape global trade flows, and what strategies can companies employ to navigate these challenges? Instructions The analysis should be well-researched and based on academic journal articles, consultancy reports, industry publications, etc. Your work should have at least 20 references. You must critically engage with the literature and incorporate real-world data and examples to support your arguments. The presentation must contain in-text citations and a complete list of references following the Harvard style. |
|
Word count (or equivalent): |
1600 words |
This is a reflection of the effort required for the assessment. Word counts will normally include any text, tables, calculations, figures, subtitles and citations. Reference lists and contents of appendices are excluded from the word count. Contents of appendices are not usually considered when determining your final assessment grade. |
|
Academic or technical terms explained: |
All terms are discussed and clarified in the classroom. |
Artificial Intelligence Models Guidance for this assessment: |
|||||||||
Artificial Intelligence (AI) models can be a powerful tool to support your learning. The University has provided some resources to support you in its appropriate usage: As per the academic regulations (Academic Handbook Ah1_08), in all cases you must submit work that is your own, acknowledging any part of it that has been informed by another source including that which is AI generated. Upon submission of work, you will be asked to confirm the following statement: I confirm that this assignment is my own work, except where I have acknowledged the use of works from other sources, including the use of any artificial intelligence (AI) tools, in accordance with what is allowable as described in the assessment brief. Please note the following:
The following information provides specific guidance for this assessment about what level of AI use is appropriate for this assessment. Remember that in all cases you must submit work that is your own, acknowledging any part of it that has been provided by another source.
|
Submission Details
Submission Deadline: |
06 March 2025 |
Estimated Feedback Return Date |
This will normally be 20 working days after initial submission. |
Submission Time: |
By 3.00pm (BST) on the deadline day. |
||
Moodle/Turnitin: |
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as a non-attempt unless you have had an extension request agreed or have approved mitigating circumstances. See the School Moodle pages for more information on extensions and mitigating circumstances. |
||
File Format: |
The assessment must be submitted as a pdf document (save the document as a pdf in your software) and submit through the Turnitin submission point in Moodle. Your assessment should be titled with your:
student ID number, module code and assessment ID, e.g. st12345678 BHL5007 WRIT1 |
||
Feedback |
Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle. Feedback will be provided with comments on your strengths and the areas which you can improve. View the guidance on how to access your feedback. All marks are provisional and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at the programme Examination Board. |
||
Assessment Criteria
Learning outcomes assessed |
Analyse and evaluate how globalisation directly affects industries and markets across the world Critically evaluate the logistics and transportation systems involved in globally driven supply networks and critically analyse the decisions surrounding the use of multi-modal logistics systems. Analyse financial agreements within supply chain management systems and critically analyse the issues surrounding tariffs, taxes and payment methods in complex supply chains |
Other skills/attributes developed This includes elements of the Cardiff Met EDGE (Ethical, Digital, Global and Entrepreneurial skills) and other attributes developed in students through the completion of the module and assessment. These will also be highlighted in the module guidance, which should be read by all students completing the module. Assessments are not just a way of auditing student knowledge. They are a process which provides additional learning and development through the preparation for and completion of the assessment. |
Ethical- This module will provide a good discussion and analysis of sustainable supply chains covering wider social, ethical and environmental issues within the business operations. Digital- this module will discuss digital transformation of operations including use of modern technologies. Global- this module is developed in the context of global operations and processes. The written report will enable students to critically apply their operations management knowledge into their coursework. Entrepreneurial- This module develops skills in the areas of use of technology, sustainability, networking, teamwork, problem solving and disruptions management; these skills will help students develop their entrepreneurial skills.
General/transferable skills: Written Communication Research and Information Synthesis Time Management and Organization Critical Thinking |
|
||||||||||||
Marking/Assessment Criteria
Level 7 |
80%-100% (Distinction+) |
70%-79% (Distinction) |
60%-69% (Merit) |
50%-59% (Pass) |
40%-49% (Narrow Fail) |
20-39% (Clear Fail) |
1-19% |
Overall summary |
Excellent (80-89%) or outstanding and exceptional (90-100%) Beyond level 7 Worthy of publication |
Very good |
Good |
Threshold |
Not met some learning outcomes/assessment criteria |
Not met many learning outcomes/assessment criteria |
No learning outcomes are met in full |
|
|||||||
Knowledge & Understanding |
Exceptional mastery of subject/research |
Subject knowledge and understanding full and detailed. Mastery demonstrated Can extend, transform and apply knowledge Awareness of limitations of knowledge Sophisticated discussion Independent thinking and action. Original insights |
Full subject knowledge and understanding. Mastery demonstrated Can extend, transform and apply knowledge Discussion of complex concepts is often tackled successfully Some independent thinking and action |
Basic but secure subject knowledge and understanding. Mastery demonstrated Frequently descriptive and based on given sources Limited independent thinking and action |
Limited subject knowledge and understanding Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions in important areas Irrelevant content |
Little subject knowledge and understanding Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions outweigh knowledge and understanding Substantially irrelevant |
Work may be: short irrelevant contain serious/numerous errors and misunderstandings no evidence of analysis, synthesis, critical evaluation and reflection no reference/minimal reference to external sources very poor presentation and inappropriate format very poor communication of information and ideas 0% Absent/ work not submitted, penalty in some misconduct cases |
Presentation and communication |
Eloquent and professional style |
Coherent and succinct Presentation standard high Logically organised Arguments are well-defined and clearly articulated |
Clear and succinct Well presented Appropriately organised |
Satisfactory communication Lacks academic rigour Describing and reporting factual information Appropriately structured |
Confused and clumsily expressed. Unclear |
Limited ability to communicate. Unclear, clumsy and inappropriate. |
|
Analysis & discussion |
Extensive and independent enquiry to solve problems |
Detailed analysis and critical enquiry Expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Highly successful in presenting, synthesising and commenting on research process and outcomes Insight on the relationship between theory and practice |
Some detailed analysis and critical enquiry Expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Considerable success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes Some linkage between theory and practice |
Some limited analysis and critical enquiry Limited expertise in highly specialised and advanced technical, professional and/or research skills Some success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes |
Some enquiry/analysis but research process and outcomes may be nave, simplistic and/or unconvincing |
Little evidence of being able to undertake enquiry/ analysis Outcomes may be inappropriate, or absent |
|
Research / scholarship |
Insight and critical awareness of research/scholarship Substantial range of reference citations, beyond expectations |
Detailed, thorough knowledge and systematic understanding of current research/advanced scholarship The use of scholarly reviews/primary sources is sophisticated Referencing accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Thorough knowledge and understanding of current research/scholarship Ability to design research/apply methods/knowledge/skills The referencing almost always accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Some knowledge of research/scholarship/application of methods/skills and their implications Some errors in referencing Over-reliance on given sources |
Limited or sporadic knowledge of research/scholarship Application largely unsuccessful Frequent errors in the referencing Over-reliance on programme materials |
Little knowledge and understanding research/scholarship. Failure to apply this knowledge Frequent errors in the referencing Reading and investigation negligible |
|
Structured argument and critical evaluation |
May challenge the boundaries of knowledge Innovative and/or creative thinking New insights informed through critical evaluation |
Critical evaluation and informed judgements Clear recognition of the complexities of academic debate. Arguments are well developed, sustained and substantiated Appropriate and sometimes innovative solutions are offered to problems There is strong evidence of effective reflection on students practice and consideration for future development |
Critical evaluation and reflection Arguments are clearly considered and substantiated Appropriate judgements and solutions offered to problems Ability to reflect on students practice and plan future development |
Limited ability to critically evaluate and reflect Arguments substantiated but under-developed Descriptive and factual presentation favoured Limited and superficial reflection with little consideration for future development |
Little evidence of critical evaluation and reflection Arguments rarely substantiated Largely descriptive Self-evaluation and reflections are extremely limited |
Some ability to describe and report but very little evidence is available to indicate an ability to engage in critical evaluation and reflection Self-evaluation and reflections on the students own practice are negligible or absent |
Further Information
Who can answer questions about my assessment?
Questions about the assessment should be directed to the staff member who has set the task/assessment brief. This will usually be the Module Leader. They will be happy to answer any queries you have.
Staff members can often provide feedback on an assignment plan but cannot review any drafts of your work prior to submission. The only exception to this rule is for Dissertation Supervisors to provide feedback on a draft of your dissertation.
Referencing and independent learning
Please ensure you reference a range of credible sources, with due attention to the academic literature in the area. The time spent on research and reading from good quality sources will be reflected in the quality of your submitted work.
Remember that what you get out of university depends on what you put in. Your teaching sessions typically represent between 10% and 30% of the time you are expected to study for your degree. A 20-credit module represents 200 hours of study time. The rest of your time should be taken up by self-directed study.
Unless stated otherwise you must use the HARVARD referencing system. Further guidance on referencing can be found in the Study Smart area on Moodle and using Cite Them Right (use your university login details to access the site). Correct referencing is an easy way to improve your marks and essential in achieving higher grades on most assessments.
Technical submission problems
It is strongly advised that you submit your work at least 24 hours before the deadline to allow time to resolve any last minute problems you might have. If you are having issues with IT or Turnitin you should contact the IT Helpdesk on (+44) 2920 417000. You may require evidence of the Helpdesk call if you are trying to demonstrate that a fault with Moodle or Turnitin was the cause of a late submission.
Extensions and mitigating circumstances
Short extensions on assessment deadlines can be requested in specific circumstances. If you are encountering particular hardship which has been affecting your studies, then you may be able to apply for mitigating circumstances. This can give the teachers on your programme more scope to adapt the assessment requirements to support your needs. Extensions and mitigating circumstances policies and procedures are regularly updated. You should refer to your degree programme or school Moodle pages for information on extensions and mitigating circumstances.
Unfair academic practice
Cardiff Met takes issues of unfair practice extremely seriously. The University has procedures and penalties for dealing with unfair academic practice. These are explained in full in the University's Unfair Practice regulations and procedures under Volume 1, Section 8 of the Academic Handbook. The Module Leader reserves the right to interview students regarding any aspect of their work submitted for assessment.
Types of Unfair Practice, include:
Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another persons words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were ones own work, for instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged paraphrasing. Further examples include:
- Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons, whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, where quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation marks and acknowledged.
- Use of another persons words or ideas that have been slightly changed or paraphrased to make it look different from the original.
- Summarising another persons ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a bibliography/reference list.
- Use of assessment writing services, essay banks and/or any other similar agencies (NB. Students are commonly being blackmailed after using essay mills).
- Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet.
- Re-use of ones own material except as authorised by your degree programme.
Collusion, which can be defined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is submitted and passed off as solely the work of one person. Modules will clearly identify where joint preparation and joint submission are permitted, in all other cases they are not.
Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations, interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other way.
How is my work graded?
Assessment grading is subject to thorough quality control processes. You can view a summary of these processes on the Assessment Explained Infographic.
Grading of work at each level of Cardiff Met degree courses is benchmarked against a set of general requirements set out in Volume 1, Section 4 of our Academic Handbook. A simplified version of these Grade Band Descriptors (GBDs) with short videos explaining some of the academic terminology used can be accessed for Foundation, 1st year, 2nd year and 3rd year undergraduate and MSc programmes.
We would strongly recommend looking at the Study Smart area of Moodle to find out more about assessments and key academic skills which can have a significant impact on your grades. Always check your work thoroughly before submission.
