Critically analyse a wide range of literature

FINM025 Rubic- Proposal

Criteria

No Submission / no evidence

Fail

Pass

Merit

Distinction

Introduction (20%) a) Identify a research topic, develop aims and objectives justified through reference to appropriate literature.

0 to 0 points

Work submitted is of no academic value/nothing submitted

1 to 9.9 points

There is some evidence of a systematic, coherent and analytical engagement with key aspects of the field of study including familiarity with the current literature developments. The topic is ill-defined, little or no rationale for selection of the problem. The introduction falls well short of the threshold standards. There is no clear justification of the research purpose. Aims and objectives are not defined and not justified.

10 to 11.9 points

The introduction is relevant and shows a greater degree of capability in relevant specialised skills. The topic is barely introduced; provides a rationale for selection but is not persuasive. Work of capable quality, which clearly demonstrates knowledge in and a critical awareness of current issues. The research questions, aims and objectives show a good understanding of the field of research.

12 to 13.9 points

The introduction is clear and demonstrates a greater degree of capability and meets research expectations. The topic is introduced; provides a brief rationale for selection of the problem that is persuasive; provides a statement of the problem, its meaning, importance and theories behind it. Includes a clear research question, aim and objectives. Statement of the research purpose and the overall reasons for the study are precise and related to the background of the problem.

14 to 20 points

Exceptional Standard. The introduction is clear, exemplary and provides evidence of a complete understanding of the project expectations. The topic is properly and concisely introduced; provides a brief and persuasive rationale for the selection of the problem. Includes a very clear research question, aim and objectives. Clear demonstration of the research purpose which is clearly linked to the background of the problem.

Literature Review (30%) b) Critically analyse a wide range of literature in accounting and finance.

0 to 0 points

Work submitted is of no academic value/nothing submitted

1 to 14.5 points

Work of poor quality that is based on minimal understanding, application or effort. Some evidence of a systematic, coherent and analytical engagement with aspects of the field of the research, including familiarity with the current literature. Poor volume of up-to-date literature that are from credible sources. Selects inappropriate theoretical framework.

15 to 17.9 points

A quality critical literature review demonstrating a limited understanding. A critical awareness of current issues, the theoretical knowledge at the forefront of the field of study. Insufficient application of up-to-date literature from academic sources. Literature used is related to the research questions and the research question.

18 to 20.9 points

A commendable quality critical literature review. Good use of up-to-date literature from both academic and credible sources. Literature used is related to the research questions and the research question is properly designed and clear. Identifies relevant theoretical framework(s).

21 to 30 points

Excellent and thorough summary of the literature review. Distinguished quality of critical literature review that is up-to-date literature from both academic and credible sources. Literature used is related to the research questions. Clearly identifies relevant theoretical framework(s); provides a rationale.

Research Methodology, Design, and Methods (30%) c) Synthesise and critique the different methodological frameworks that influence research to inform and justify a research methodology.

0 to 0 points

Work submitted is of no academic value/nothing submitted

1 to 14.5 points

Poor methodology. Fails to introduce the research methodology, research design and methods. Includes no researchable questions. Lacks connection between research questions, purpose and problem. No reference to the type of method used. Vaguely describes data analysis procedures.

15 to 17.9 points

A quality but brief research method section which introduces methodology, research design and methods briefly. Lists researchable question(s). Makes a connection between research methods and questions, purpose and problem. Includes a vague and non-persuasive justification for the type of research used. Describes a few of the procedures used to conduct the study for sample recruitment, informed consent, maintaining data.

18 to 20.9 points

A commendable preview of the methods used for this study which introduces research methodology, research design and methods briefly but clearly describes methods. Lists researchable question(s). Makes a clear and compelling connection between research methodology, methods, and research design to address the questions. Describes if research is qualitative or quantitative or mixed methods and provides adequate justification.

21 to 30 points

Exceptionally clear explanation and justification of research philosophy, approach and methods for data collection. Describes if research is qualitative or quantitative or mixed methods. Provides a clear justification for selection of type in relation to research problem and research questions. Includes a proper discussion of research design, the definition of population, sample size, determination and sample techniques used. Clearly describes the procedures used to conduct the study for sample recruitment, informed consent, maintaining data.

Significance of proposed research , Research limitations and direction for future research (10%) e) Develop independent working and project management skills.

0 to 0 points

Work submitted is of no academic value/nothing submitted

1 to 4.9 points

Poor communicated and evaluated preliminary statement of what they may find or demonstrate by having undertaken the research, the importance of this work, limitations and areas for further research development.

5 to 5.9 points

A quality critical preliminary statement of what they may find or demonstrate by having undertaken the research, the importance of this work, limitations and areas for further research development.

6 to 6.9 points

A commendable preliminary statement of what they may find or demonstrate by having undertaken the research, the importance of this work, limitations and areas for further research development.

7 to 10 points

Distinguished well communicated and evaluated preliminary statement of what they may find or demonstrate by having undertaken the research,  the importance of this work,  limitations and areas for further research development.

Professional / academic quality (10%) f) Initiate a reflective and independent approach to learning in managing an extended project. g) Communicate information and present complex arguments, clearly and accurately in a manner suited to an academic audience.

0 to 0 points

Work submitted is of no academic value/nothing submitted

1 to 4.9 points

Poor evidence is included or provided but missing in some very important aspects

5 to 5.9 points

A quality evidence which clearly demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes

6 to 6.9 points

Commendable high quality, demonstrating evidence which is rigorous and convincing, appropriate to the task or activity

7 to 10 points

Distinguishing very high quality, demonstrating evidence which is strong, robust and consistent, appropriate to the task or activity