Posted: October 12th, 2022

CIS7008 Technology Project Management

Notice: Use this template for steerage solely. You could change the title of the sections as applicable.
General Title
Scholar Identify
General Introduction
Critique 1 Title (Repeat the method for all of the three critiques)
Introduction
Sometimes, the introduction is brief (lower than 10% of the phrase size) and it’s best to:
• Identify the work being reviewed in addition to the date it was created and the identify of the writer/creator.
• Describe the primary argument or goal of the work.
• Clarify the context during which the work was created. This might embody the social or political context, the place of the work in a inventive or tutorial custom, or the connection between the work and the creator’s life expertise.
• Have a concluding sentence that signposts what your analysis of the work might be. For example, it could point out whether or not it’s a optimistic, unfavourable, or blended analysis.
Abstract
Briefly summarise the details and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by utilizing strategies, types, media, characters or symbols. This abstract shouldn’t be the main target of the critique and is often shorter than the essential analysis.
Essential analysis
This part ought to give a scientific and detailed Assessment of the totally different parts of the work, evaluating how effectively the creator was capable of obtain the aim via these. For instance: you’d assess the plot construction, characterisation and setting of a novel; an Assessment of a portray would take a look at composition, brush strokes, color and light-weight; a critique of a analysis challenge would take a look at topic choice, design of the experiment, Assessment of information and conclusions.
A essential analysis doesn’t merely spotlight unfavourable impressions. It ought to deconstruct the work and establish each strengths and weaknesses. It ought to look at the work and consider its success, in mild of its goal.
Examples of key essential questions that would Help your Assessment embody:
• Who’s the creator? Is the work introduced objectively or subjectively?
• What are the goals of the work? Have been the goals achieved?
• What strategies, types, media had been used within the work? Are they efficient in portraying the aim?
• What assumptions underlie the work? Do they have an effect on its validity?
• What kinds of proof or persuasion are used? Has proof been interpreted pretty?
• How is the work structured? Does it favour a specific interpretation or standpoint? Is it efficient?
• Does the work improve understanding of key concepts or theories? Does the work have interaction (or fail to interact) with key ideas or different works in its self-discipline?

This analysis is written in formal tutorial model and logically introduced. Group and order your concepts into paragraphs. Begin with the broad impressions first after which transfer into the small print of the technical parts. For shorter critiques, chances are you’ll focus on the strengths of the works, after which the weaknesses. In longer critiques, chances are you’ll want to focus on the optimistic and unfavourable of every key essential Question Assignment in particular person paragraphs.
To help the analysis, present proof from the work itself, comparable to a quote or instance, and also you also needs to cite proof from associated sources. Clarify how this proof helps your analysis of the work.
Conclusion
That is often a really transient paragraph, which incorporates:
• A press release indicating the general analysis of the work
• A abstract of the important thing causes, recognized in the course of the essential analysis, why this analysis was shaped.
In some circumstances, suggestions for enchancment on the work could also be applicable.

Half 1: Report
Title web page Mark
General introduction (150 phrases)- Clearly introduce all three chosen papers; Present a context; justify why these had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. Clearly define how the Question Assignment might be handle (plus conclusion *) 7
Desk of contents
Paper 1 – write a 580-word critique 12
Paper 2 – write a 580-word critique 12
Paper three – write a 580-word critique 12
General conclusion (110 phrases) *
References
Appendices
Writing – Proof of:
Format: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Grammar, spelling, punctuation; Writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) 7
Whole 50

Assessment
Temporary

Module Code Module Title
CIS7008 Know-how Project Management
Educational 12 months Semester
2022/2023 1
Module Chief electronic mail

Content material

CONTENT 1
ASSESSMENT DETAILS three
SUBMISSION DETAILS 5
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 7
FURTHER INFORMATION 16
Getting ready for placement 16
Equality and variety 16
College students with further necessities 16
Who can reply questions on my Assessment? 17
Referencing and unbiased studying 17
Technical submission issues 18
Extensions and mitigating circumstances 18
Unfair tutorial apply 18
How is my work graded? 19

Assessment Particulars
Assessment title Abr. Weighting
Know-how Project Management – Critique WRIT1 50 %
Cross marks are 40% for undergraduate work and 50% for postgraduate work until acknowledged in any other case.

Activity/Assessment transient:

Select three papers from the titles listed under and write a 580-word critique of every. You need to consider the factors made, giving your individual opinions the place applicable. The entire task might be a complete of 2000 phrases (+/- 10%).

Creator Title Journal/Textual content
Zaheer, R.A., Tanveer, A. and Fatima, H.M., 2016 An Agile, Clever and Scalable Framework for International Software program Improvement. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Know-how, Worldwide Journal of Laptop, Electrical, Automation, Management and Info Engineering, 10(four), pp.628-635.
Bjørn, P., 2016. New fundamentals for CSCW analysis: from distance to politics. Interactions, 23(three), pp.50-53.
Coram, M. and Bohner, S., 2005, April. The affect of agile strategies on software program challenge administration. In 12th IEEE Worldwide Convention and Workshops on the Engineering of Laptop-Based mostly Methods (ECBS’05) (pp. 363-370). IEEE.
Berger, H. and Lewis, C., 2011. Stakeholder Assessment is Key to Profitable Consumer-Provider Relationships of International Outsourcing Tasks. Stakeholder Assessment is essential to shopper–provider relationships of worldwide outsourcing challenge success. Worldwide Journal of Info Management, 31(5), pp.480-485.
Mishra et al., 2020
Private response methods via the prism of scholars’ experiences Laptop Functions in Engineering Schooling. https://repository.cardiffmet.ac.uk/deal with/10369/11150

Lewis, R. (2019) Wish to mislead and confuse? Use statistics! https://scientistsarehumans.com/2019/01/26/want-to-mislead-and-confuse-use-statistics/

Every group could have a group chief who will coordinate the submission of the report. Staff members must collectively put together the report and every pupil must make sure that the group chief could have all of the required content material effectively earlier than the submission deadline.

As this task is a group submission, particular person pupil marks might be calculated by making use of the truthful contribution mark weightage to the group mark.

Phrase rely (or equal): 2000
This a mirrored image of the hassle required for the Assessment. Phrase counts will usually embody any textual content, tables, calculations, figures, subtitles and citations. Reference lists and contents of appendices are excluded from the phrase rely. Contents of appendices usually are not often thought-about when figuring out your last Assessment grade.
The Critique Template

The next showcases the primary options of a critique and is supplied as one instance.
Introduction
Sometimes, the introduction is brief (lower than 10% of the phrase size) and it’s best to:

• Identify the work being reviewed in addition to the date it was created and the identify of the writer/creator.
• Describe the primary argument or goal of the work.
• Clarify the context during which the work was created. This might embody the social or political context, the place of the work in a inventive or tutorial custom, or the connection between the work and the creator’s life expertise.
• Have a concluding sentence that signposts what your analysis of the work might be. For example, it could point out whether or not it’s a optimistic, unfavourable, or blended analysis.
Abstract
Briefly summarise the details and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by utilizing strategies, types, media, characters or symbols. This abstract shouldn’t be the main target of the critique and is often shorter than the essential analysis.

Essential analysis
This part ought to give a scientific and detailed Assessment of the totally different parts of the work, evaluating how effectively the creator was capable of obtain the aim via these. For instance: you’d assess the plot construction, characterisation and setting of a novel; an Assessment of a portray would take a look at composition, brush strokes, color and light-weight; a critique of a analysis challenge would take a look at topic choice, design of the experiment, Assessment of information and conclusions.

A essential analysis doesn’t merely spotlight unfavourable impressions. It ought to deconstruct the work and establish each strengths and weaknesses. It ought to look at the work and consider its success, in mild of its goal.

Examples of key essential questions that would Help your Assessment embody:
• Who’s the creator? Is the work introduced objectively or subjectively?
• What are the goals of the work? Have been the goals achieved?
• What strategies, types, media had been used within the work? Are they efficient in portraying the aim?
• What assumptions underlie the work? Do they have an effect on its validity?
• What kinds of proof or persuasion are used? Has proof been interpreted pretty?
• How is the work structured? Does it favour a specific interpretation or standpoint? Is it efficient?
• Does the work improve understanding of key concepts or theories? Does the work have interaction (or fail to interact) with key ideas or different works in its self-discipline?

This analysis is written in formal tutorial model and logically introduced. Group and order your concepts into paragraphs. Begin with the broad impressions first after which transfer into the small print of the technical parts. For shorter critiques, chances are you’ll focus on the strengths of the works, after which the weaknesses. In longer critiques, chances are you’ll want to focus on the optimistic and unfavourable of every key essential Question Assignment in particular person paragraphs.

To help the analysis, present proof from the work itself, comparable to a quote or instance, and also you also needs to cite proof from associated sources. Clarify how this proof helps your analysis of the work.

Conclusion
That is often a really transient paragraph, which incorporates:
• A press release indicating the general analysis of the work
• A abstract of the important thing causes, recognized in the course of the essential analysis, why this analysis was shaped.
• In some circumstances, suggestions for enchancment on the work could also be applicable.

Guidelines for a critique
Have I:
• Talked about the identify of the work, the date of its creation and the identify of the creator?
• Precisely summarised the work being critiqued?
• Primarily targeted on the essential analysis of the work?
• Systematically outlined an analysis of every factor of the work to realize the general goal?
• Used proof, from the work itself in addition to different sources, to again and illustrate my Assessment of parts of the work?
• Shaped an total analysis of the work, based mostly on essential studying?
• Used a well-structured introduction, physique and conclusion?
• Used appropriate grammar, spelling and punctuation; clear presentation;
• Used the Harvard referencing model for all references (together with photographs)? Embody all sources cited in your critique in a reference checklist.

Submission Particulars
Submission Deadline: Week 6 Estimated Suggestions
Return Date This can usually be 20 working days after preliminary submission.
Submission
Time: By four.00pm on the deadline day.
Moodle/Turnitin: Any assessments submitted after the deadline is not going to be marked and might be recorded as a non-attempt until you may have had an extension request agreed or have accepted mitigating circumstances. See the Faculty Moodle pages for extra data on extensions and mitigating circumstances.
File Format: The Assessment should be submitted as a pdf doc (save the doc as a pdf in your software program) and submit via the Turnitin submission level in Moodle.

Your Assessment ought to be titled along with your:

pupil ID quantity, module code and Assessment ID,
e.g. st12345678 BHL5007 WRIT1
Suggestions Suggestions for the Assessment might be supplied electronically by way of Moodle. Suggestions might be supplied with feedback in your strengths and the areas which you’ll enhance. View the steerage on the way to entry your suggestions.

All marks are provisional and are topic to high quality assurance processes and affirmation on the programme Examination Board.

Assessment Standards
Studying outcomes assessed
Half 1: Report
Title web page
General introduction (150 phrases)- Clearly introduce all three chosen papers; Present a context; justify why these had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. Clearly define how the Question Assignment might be handle (plus conclusion *) 7
Desk of contents
Paper 1 – write a 580-word critique 12
Paper 2 – write a 580-word critique 12
Paper three – write a 580-word critique 12
General conclusion (110 phrases) *
References
Appendices
Writing – Proof of:
Format: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Grammar, spelling, punctuation; Writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) 7
Whole 50

Different abilities/attributes developed
This consists of parts of the Cardiff Met EDGE (Moral, Digital, International and Entrepreneurial abilities) and different attributes developed in college students via the completion of the module and Assessment. These may also be highlighted within the module steerage, which ought to be learn by all college students finishing the module. Assessments usually are not only a method of auditing pupil data. They’re a course of which offers further studying and growth via the preparation for and completion of the Assessment.
This module Assessment offers alternatives for college students to exhibit growth of the next EDGE Competencies:
• Moral issues of group administration and human centred approaches to battle decision.
• Digital administration strategies are examined and used all through the module and duties.
• Views of worldwide software program growth (GSD) are examined and mentioned. Activity entails reasoning of multi-cultural groups in a number of nations.
• How Project Management can used to help tight budgets and the entrepreneurial growth.

Marking/Assessment Standards
70 – 100%
(Distinction)
The necessities detailed within the specification are met absolutely. A wonderful critique of the three chosen papers that successfully focuses on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Glorious integration and stability of your opinion to supply cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. A wonderful introduction and conclusion. The report is excellently introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a excessive normal. The report is formatted to comprise all related sections. Increased grades of A will present proof of creativity & additional effort comparable to studying across the topic or commenting on the deserves or in any other case of the system/analysis documented.

60-69%
(Advantage)
The necessities detailed within the specification are nearly absolutely met. A great critique of the three chosen papers that has (in lots of locations) successfully targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Good integration and stability of your opinion. Affordable and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. A great introduction and conclusion. The report is effectively introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. The report is formatted to comprise all related sections. The content material might be full and might be to a reliable however much less exacting normal than for a 70+. Normally, the report will comprise all of the important sections, will probably be well-written, however the excessive normal could also be much less constant in some sections of the report than others.

50-59%
(Cross)
The necessities detailed within the specification are considerably met. A reasonably good critique of the three chosen papers that has in a number of locations targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A reasonably good integration and stability of your opinion to supply pretty cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with some high quality arguments and analysis. A reasonably good introduction and conclusion. The report is pretty effectively introduced and written, with a reasonably good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a reasonably good normal. The content material might be considerably full and might be of an appropriate degree. The report will comprise all of the important sections, written to a reasonably good degree.

40-49%
(Fail)
The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met or poorly met in locations. An incomplete/ not efficient/ non-existent critique of the three chosen papers that has no give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A really poor integration and stability of your opinion, poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. A poor/common introduction and conclusion. General, the report is poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in most facets.
<35%
(Clear Fail)
The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. No critique of the three chosen papers is current. No give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing has been supplied. No integration and stability of your opinion, very poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. A poor introduction and conclusion. General, the report could be very poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in all facets.

Additional Info on Assessment, referencing and grading might be discovered within the Module Handbook (on Moodle)

Marking/Assessment Standards

Questions Sub Questions <35%
Clear Fail 35-39%
Fail 40-49%
third 50-59%
2:2 60-69%
2:1 >70%
1st
General introduction and conclusion of report 7% A really poor or no introduction of all three chosen papers; A really poor (or no) context supplied; A really poor (or no) justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. A really poor (or no) define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and A really poor (or no) conclusion. A poor introduction of all three chosen papers; A poor context supplied; A poor justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. A poor define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and a poor conclusion. A median introduction of all three chosen papers; A median context supplied; A median justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. A median define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and a median conclusion. A reasonably clear introduction of all three chosen papers; A good context supplied; A great justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. A great define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and a very good conclusion. A transparent introduction of all three chosen papers; An excellent context supplied; An excellent justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. An excellent define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and an excellent conclusion. A really clear introduction of all three chosen papers; Glorious context; Glorious justification of why these papers had been chosen and why you’re feeling they’re necessary to critically consider. Glorious define of how the Question Assignment might be handle and glorious conclusion.
Critique1 12% Introduction
(2%) A really poor introduction. Little or no and/ or no readability or construction within the introduction. A poor introduction. Little readability and/ or construction within the introduction. A median introduction. Some readability and/ or construction in locations within the introduction. A great and pretty convincing introduction. A considerably clear and well-structured introduction. An excellent and convincing Introduction. A fairly clear and well-structured Introduction. Glorious and really convincing Introduction. A transparent and well-structured Introduction.
Abstract
(2%) A really poor abstract. A abstract with little or no element, no depth and no perception that covers not one of the related factors of the critique. A poor abstract. A abstract with little element, depth and perception that covers only a few of the related factors of the critique. A median abstract. A abstract with common element, depth and perception that covers a number of of the related factors of the critique. A good and pretty convincing abstract. A some what detailed, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers a number of the related factors of the critique. An excellent and convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers practically all the related factors of the critique. Glorious and really convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers all the related factors of the critique.
Essential Analysis (6%) The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. No critique of the chosen paper is current. No give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing has been supplied. No integration and stability of your opinion, very poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the report could be very poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in all facets. No references used. The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. An incomplete/ not efficient/ non-existent critique of the chosen paper that has no give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A really poor/lacking integration and stability of your opinion, poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the essential analysis is poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in most facets. Little high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification have been poorly met in locations. A median critique of the chosen paper that has slightly give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A median integration and stability of your opinion to supply common arguments which can be backed up with just a few high quality arguments and analysis. The essential analysis is common (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with a median logical stream of content material. The content material might be to a reasonably acceptable degree, though there could also be some minor omissions and inconsistencies. A median high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are considerably met. A reasonably good critique of the chosen paper that has in a number of locations targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A reasonably good integration and stability of your opinion to supply pretty cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with some high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is pretty effectively introduced and written, with a reasonably good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a reasonably good normal. The content material might be considerably full and might be of an appropriate degree. The essential analysis might be written to a reasonably good degree. Good high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are nearly absolutely met. A great critique of the paper that has (in lots of locations) successfully targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Good integration and stability of your opinion. Affordable and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is effectively introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. The content material is full and might be to a reliable however much less exacting normal than for a 70+. Normally, the analysis is well-written, however the excessive normal could also be much less constant in some sections of the report than others. An excellent high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are met absolutely. A wonderful critique of the chosen paper that successfully focuses on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Glorious integration and stability of your opinion to supply cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is excellently introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a excessive normal. Increased grades of A will present proof of creativity & additional effort comparable to studying across the topic or commenting on the deserves or in any other case of the system/analysis documented. Glorious high quality of references used.
Conclusion
(2%) A really poor conclusion supplied which covers little to not one of the required factors. A poor conclusion supplied which covers a number of of the required factors. A median conclusion supplied which covers a number of the required factors. A good and pretty efficient conclusion supplied which covers a lot of the required factors. An excellent and efficient conclusion supplied which covers practically all of the required factors. Glorious and really efficient conclusion protecting all of the required factors.
Critique2 12% Introduction
(2%) A really poor introduction. Little or no and/ or no readability or construction within the introduction. A poor introduction. Little readability and/ or construction within the introduction. A median introduction. Some readability and/ or construction in locations within the introduction. A great and pretty convincing introduction. A considerably clear and well-structured introduction. An excellent and convincing Introduction. A fairly clear and well-structured Introduction. Glorious and really convincing Introduction. A transparent and well-structured Introduction.
Abstract
(2%) A really poor abstract. A abstract with little or no element, no depth andno perception that covers not one of the related factors of the critique. A poor abstract. A abstract with little element, depth and perception that covers only a few of the related factors of the critique. A median abstract. A abstract with common element, depth and perception that covers a number of of the related factors of the critique. A good and pretty convincing abstract. A soemwhat detailed, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers a number of the related factors of the critique. An excellent and convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers practically all the related factors of the critique. Glorious and really convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers all the related factors of the critique.
Essential Analysis (6%) The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. No critique of the chosen paper is current. No give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing has been supplied. No integration and stability of your opinion, very poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the report could be very poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in all facets. No references used. The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. An incomplete/ not efficient/ non-existent critique of the chosen paper that has no give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A really poor/lacking integration and stability of your opinion, poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the essential analysis is poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in most facets. Little high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification have been poorly met in locations. A median critique of the chosen paper that has slightly give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A median integration and stability of your opinion to supply common arguments which can be backed up with just a few high quality arguments and analysis. The essential analysis is common (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with a median logical stream of content material. The content material might be to a reasonably acceptable degree, though there could also be some minor omissions and inconsistencies. A median high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are considerably met. A reasonably good critique of the chosen paper that has in a number of locations targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A reasonably good integration and stability of your opinion to supply pretty cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with some high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is pretty effectively introduced and written, with a reasonably good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a reasonably good normal. The content material might be considerably full and might be of an appropriate degree. The essential analysis might be written to a reasonably good degree. Good high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are nearly absolutely met. A great critique of the paper that has (in lots of locations) successfully targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Good integration and stability of your opinion. Affordable and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is effectively introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. The content material is full and might be to a reliable however much less exacting normal than for a 70+. Normally, the analysis is well-written, however the excessive normal could also be much less constant in some sections of the report than others. An excellent high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are met absolutely. A wonderful critique of the chosen paper that successfully focuses on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Glorious integration and stability of your opinion to supply cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is excellently introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a excessive normal. Increased grades of A will present proof of creativity & additional effort comparable to studying across the topic or commenting on the deserves or in any other case of the system/analysis documented. Glorious high quality of references used.
Conclusion (2%) A really poor conclusion supplied which covers little to not one of the required factors. A poor conclusion supplied which covers a number of of the required factors. A median conclusion supplied which covers a number of the required factors. A good and pretty efficient conclusion supplied which covers a lot of the required factors. An excellent and efficient conclusion supplied which covers practically all of the required factors. Glorious and really efficient conclusion protecting all of the required factors.
Critique3 12% Introduction
(2%) A really poor introduction. Little or no and/ or no readability or construction within the introduction. A poor introduction. Little readability and/ or construction within the introduction. A median introduction. Some readability and/ or construction in locations within the introduction. A great and pretty convincing introduction. A considerably clear and well-structured introduction. An excellent and convincing Introduction. A fairly clear and well-structured Introduction. Glorious and really convincing Introduction. A transparent and well-structured Introduction.
Abstract
(2%) A really poor abstract. A abstract with little or no element, no depth andno perception that covers not one of the related factors of the critique. A poor abstract. A abstract with little element, depth and perception that covers only a few of the related factors of the critique. A median abstract. A abstract with common element, depth and perception that covers a number of of the related factors of the critique. A good and pretty convincing abstract. A soemwhat detailed, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers a number of the related factors of the critique. An excellent and convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers practically all the related factors of the critique. Glorious and really convincing abstract. An in depth, in-depth and insightful abstract that covers all the related factors of the critique.
Essential Analysis (6%) The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. No critique of the chosen paper is current. No give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing has been supplied. No integration and stability of your opinion, very poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the report could be very poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in all facets. No references used. The necessities detailed within the specification haven’t been met. An incomplete/ not efficient/ non-existent critique of the chosen paper that has no give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A really poor/lacking integration and stability of your opinion, poor arguments that aren’t backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. General, the essential analysis is poor (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with no logical stream of content material. Content material and presentation are missing in most facets. Little high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification have been poorly met in locations. A median critique of the chosen paper that has slightly give attention to the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A median integration and stability of your opinion to supply common arguments which can be backed up with just a few high quality arguments and analysis. The essential analysis is common (each when it comes to presentation and writing), with a median logical stream of content material. The content material might be to a reasonably acceptable degree, though there could also be some minor omissions and inconsistencies. A median high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are considerably met. A reasonably good critique of the chosen paper that has in a number of locations targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. A reasonably good integration and stability of your opinion to supply pretty cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with some high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is pretty effectively introduced and written, with a reasonably good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a reasonably good normal. The content material might be considerably full and might be of an appropriate degree. The essential analysis might be written to a reasonably good degree. Good high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are nearly absolutely met. A great critique of the paper that has (in lots of locations) successfully targeted on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Good integration and stability of your opinion. Affordable and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is effectively introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. The content material is full and might be to a reliable however much less exacting normal than for a 70+. Normally, the analysis is well-written, however the excessive normal could also be much less constant in some sections of the report than others. An excellent high quality of references used. The necessities detailed within the specification are met absolutely. A wonderful critique of the chosen paper that successfully focuses on the general effectiveness and usefulness of the work it’s critiquing. Glorious integration and stability of your opinion to supply cheap and convincing arguments which can be backed up with high quality arguments and analysis. The analysis is excellently introduced, coherently written, with a very good logical stream of content material. Specifically, the contents laid out are all current and are of a excessive normal. Increased grades of A will present proof of creativity & additional effort comparable to studying across the topic or commenting on the deserves or in any other case of the system/analysis documented. Glorious high quality of references used.
Conclusion
(2%) A really poor conclusion supplied which covers little to not one of the required factors. A poor conclusion supplied which covers a number of of the required factors. A median conclusion supplied which covers a number of the required factors. A good and pretty efficient conclusion supplied which covers a lot of the required factors. An excellent and efficient conclusion supplied which covers practically all of the required factors. Glorious and really efficient conclusion protecting all of the required factors.
Writing 7% Very Poor format: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Very poor grammar, spelling, punctuation; Very poor writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) Poor format: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Poor grammar, spelling, punctuation; Poor writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) Common formatting: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Common grammar, spelling, punctuation; Common writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) Good formatting: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Good grammar, spelling, punctuation; Good writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) Superb formatting: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Superb grammar, spelling, punctuation; Superb writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative) Glorious format: Arial 12pt, 1.5 line spaced, justified; Pagination; Glorious grammar, spelling, punctuation; Glorious writing model (sentence construction, paragraph construction, stream of narrative)

Additional Info

Getting ready for placement

As detailed within the Educational Handbook, Cardiff Metropolitan College will make sure that a threat Assessment of the work-based or placement studying alternative is accomplished earlier than you start the chance. We may also make sure that a written settlement setting out the obligations of all events
exists between the college, the coed and the work-based or placement studying supplier.

You will have to finish the required pre-placement preparation as directed and please converse along with your Module Chief if there’s something that you simply’re unsure about. All pre-placement preparation must be accomplished previous to commencing placement. Till the required documentation is accomplished, any placement exercise is not going to be recognised by the college.

Equality and variety

Cardiff Metropolitan College is dedicated to selling and implementing greatest apply in Equality and Variety (E&D) in an effort to present a working and studying surroundings to allow each workers and college students to succeed in their full potential.

We want to work past the legislative necessities within the supply of E&D insurance policies, and goal for equality of alternative to be embedded in every little thing we do. Cardiff Metropolitan College is an organisation the place variety is valued, equality is promoted and companies are delivered to help all workers and college students.

The College is conscious of the necessity to recognise folks’s identities as multi-dimensional and is dedicated to offering a optimistic working and studying surroundings free from discrimination, harassment, and victimisation on the grounds of age, incapacity, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, being pregnant and maternity, race, faith and perception, intercourse or sexual orientation.

As a placement pupil, you’re certain by the identical insurance policies and we anticipate you to deal with friends, colleagues, college workers, and all others with dignity and respect always. Ought to you may have any issues relating to this, please contact your Module Chief.

College students with further necessities

Cardiff Metropolitan College and placement suppliers are required to make sure equality of alternative for all college students. To help pupil wants, we and placement suppliers will make ‘cheap changes’ and guarantee proportional modifications to processes and procedures to supply an accessible working and studying surroundings.

‘Affordable changes’ are the changes made by academic and placement suppliers to make sure equality for college students or staff with a incapacity. These changes could possibly be eradicating bodily boundaries or offering sure aids or tools. Affordable changes in schooling can embody permitting college students to audio-record lectures or have longer time inside exams. The necessities of your module and placement must be adhered to by all college students, nonetheless cheap changes can adapt how the necessities are achieved.

As a way to adhere to the Equality Act, when you’ve got disclosed in your placement preparation that you’ve a psychological or bodily incapacity and are being supported by the Cardiff Metropolitan College Wellbeing Service, your further wants in relation to placement might be mentioned with a related member of workers. The affect of your incapacity might be mentioned and cheap changes for placements might be recognized and regarded. Along with your permission, we are going to disclose this data to your placement supplier to make sure they’ll help your wants.

This data (along with your consent) can also be shared with Cardiff Metropolitan Wellbeing Service to make sure parity and efficient help.

We strongly advise that you simply stay open, sincere and proactive relating to any difficulties that will happen inside your placement and maintain Cardiff Metropolitan workers up to date in order that we are able to help you appropriately.

You’ve gotten the proper to not disclose your incapacity in your preparation for placement, and chances are you’ll elect to not attend a gathering to debate its affect. Nonetheless, on this occasion we won’t be able to help you or make changes and this might affect in your placement expertise and total efficiency.

In some circumstances, college students might have a situation which they don’t regard as a incapacity, nonetheless if changes are required inside their placements in an effort to handle this situation, college students might be required to reveal this via Scholar Providers. We’re unable to make changes with out an Assessment of want having been made.

Who can reply questions on my Assessment?

Questions concerning the Assessment ought to be directed to the workers member who has set the duty/Assessment transient. This can often be the Module Chief. They are going to be glad to reply any queries you may have.

Workers members can typically present suggestions on an task plan however can not assessment any drafts of your work previous to submission. The one exception to this rule is for Dissertation Supervisors to supply suggestions on a draft of your dissertation.

Referencing and unbiased studying

Please make sure you reference a spread of credible sources, with due consideration to the tutorial literature within the space. The time spent on analysis and studying from good high quality sources might be mirrored within the high quality of your submitted work.

Keep in mind that what you get out of college depends upon what you place in. Your instructing periods usually characterize between 10% and 30% of the time you’re anticipated to review to your diploma. A 20-credit module represents 200 hours of examine time. The remainder of your time ought to be taken up by self-directed examine.

Except acknowledged in any other case you have to use the HARVARD referencing system. Additional steerage on referencing might be discovered within the Examine Good space on Moodle and at www.citethemrightonline.com (use your college login particulars to entry the location). Appropriate referencing is a simple method to enhance your marks and important in attaining larger grades on most assessments.

Technical submission issues

It’s strongly suggested that you simply submit your work a minimum of 24 hours earlier than the deadline to permit time to resolve any final minute issues you may need. In case you are having points with IT or Turnitin it’s best to contact the IT Helpdesk on (+44) 2920 417000. You could require proof of the Helpdesk name in case you are making an attempt to exhibit fault with Moodle or Turnitin was the reason for a late submission.

Extensions and mitigating circumstances

Brief extensions on Assessment deadlines might be requested in particular circumstances. In case you are encountering specific hardship which has been affecting your research, then you definately could possibly apply for mitigating circumstances. This may give the academics in your programme extra scope to adapt the Assessment necessities to help your wants. Extensions and mitigating circumstances insurance policies and procedures are commonly up to date. You need to consult with your diploma programme or college Moodle pages for data on extensions and mitigating circumstances.

Unfair tutorial apply

Cardiff Met takes problems with unfair apply extraordinarily critically. The College has procedures and penalties for coping with unfair tutorial apply. These are defined in full within the College’s Unfair Observe rules and procedures below Quantity 1, Part eight of the Educational Handbook. The Module Chief reserves the proper to interview college students relating to any side of their work submitted for Assessment.

Varieties of Unfair Observe, embody:

Plagiarism, which might be outlined as utilizing with out acknowledgement one other particular person’s phrases or concepts and submitting them for Assessment as if it had been one’s personal work, as an example by copying, translating from one language to a different or unacknowledged paraphrasing. Additional examples embody:
• Use of any citation(s) from the revealed or unpublished work of different individuals, whether or not revealed in textbooks, articles, the Internet, or in every other format, the place quotations haven’t been clearly recognized as such by being positioned in citation marks and acknowledged.
• Use of one other particular person’s phrases or concepts which have been barely modified or paraphrased to make it look totally different from the unique.
• Summarising one other particular person’s concepts, judgments, diagrams, figures, or pc programmes regardless of that particular person within the textual content and the supply in a bibliography/reference checklist.
• Use of Assessment writing companies, essay banks and/or every other comparable companies (NB. College students are generally being blackmailed after utilizing essay mills).
• Use of unacknowledged materials downloaded from the Web.
• Re-use of 1’s personal materials besides as authorised by your diploma programme.
Collusion, which might be outlined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is submitted and handed off as solely the work of 1 particular person. Modules will clearly establish the place joint preparation and joint submission are permitted, in all different circumstances they aren’t.
Fabrication of information, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations, interviews or different types of knowledge assortment and Assessment, or performing dishonestly in every other method.

How is my work graded?

Assessment grading is topic to thorough high quality management processes. You’ll be able to view a abstract of those processes on the Assessment Defined Infographic.

Grading of labor at every degree of Cardiff Met diploma programs is benchmarked in opposition to a set of normal necessities set out in Quantity 1, Part four.three of our Educational Handbook. A simplified model of those Grade Band Descriptors (GBDs) with quick movies explaining a number of the tutorial terminology used might be accessed for Basis, 1st 12 months, 2nd 12 months and third 12 months undergraduate and MSc programmes.

We might strongly suggest trying on the Examine Good space of Moodle to seek out out extra about assessments and key tutorial abilities which might have a major affect in your grades. At all times test your work totally earlier than submission.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Technology Project Management, CIS7008