‘
‘
March 21, 2017
‘
<'">
0
Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
0
Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
Assignment 1c Guidelines and Marking Criteria
Title: Assignment 1c – Literature Review
Marks: 25 (which is 25% of the unit grade)
Due: Prior to 11pm on Friday 8th April (week 6), 2016.
Task: Undertake a Literature Review (max 1500 words) on ‘Strategies for Building Organisational Commitment’. The review is to focus solely on refereed academic publications (i.e. journal articles).
Purpose: As students of Organisational Behaviour it is important that you are able to effectively identify, collate and disseminate credible information on a range of issues that have strong theoretical and/or practical relevance to the field. Such information will often provide the basis for effective planning and decision-making.
Format: The single document submitted for this assignment is to contain the following components and formatting features:
- Assignment ‘Coversheet’ (document is available in the Assignment file on Blackboard).
- Assignment ‘Coverpage’ identifying the unit name & code, assignment title, student name & ID, and the report word count (note: Reference List content is not included in this count).
- Content; i.e. your Literature Review (maximum of 1500 words).
- Develop a unique Title; one that signals the central theme or focus of the review. Thereafter you can include any subheadings that might help to effectively structure the discussion. No Table of Contents is required.
- Both in-text and reference list skills must be demonstrated (use the Harvard Referencing style).
- The report is to include a minimum of six distinct references from academic journals. You may cite your textbook and sources identified in it but they do not contribute towards the reference count. Quoting is not permitted. Paraphrase the information you obtain from your various sources.
- Reference List.
Adopt the following formatting features for the paper:
- Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after your coverpage.
- Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1½ line spacing.
- Margins – top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page boarders.
- Spelling – if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check.
- Writing and grammar must conform to the standards of a professional report.
Submitting: All assignments are to be submitted through ‘Turn-it-in,’ which can be accessed from the ‘Assignment 1’ folder on Blackboard. The link will be activated in week 4 and you can submit the assignment any time up to the due date.
The file you submit should be labelled in the following manner:
Surname, initial, student code, MNG82210, asmt 1c
For example – Gillett, P, 012345, MNG82210, asmt 1c
Feedback: Students who submit their report by the due date will receive feedback within 2 weeks. This feedback will be in the form of a marking rubric and a copy of your report with electronic comments from the marker.
Marking Criteria:
| A. Content
(weight = 28% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. Much of the information on Organisational Commitment (OC) is inaccurate or the level of detail is insufficient.
2) Pass. The review reflects a basic understanding of OC. Extending the scope of the review would help to demonstrate a deeper level of knowledge. 3) Credit. The review reflects a good effort to effectively discuss OC and the strategies that might be used to develop it. Work on developing your academic skills by synthesising the key information presented in your review, rather than repeating content from individual sources. 4) Distinction. The review scope is sufficiently broad and a good understanding of the OC concept is demonstrated. Further analysis of the key concepts will help to reveal and support the specific intent of your review. 5) HD. The review reflects an extremely strong understanding of OC and the strategies for developing it. The discussion effectively synthesises information from different sources and your strong analysis gives the review a unique and purposeful quality. |
| B. Writing Quality
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. The writing is ineffective due to numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors.
2) Pass. Proof-read the final document to identify and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar. Plan for and undertake additional drafts as this will help to improve the quality of your written work. 3) Credit. A good standard of writing is provided (no spelling errors) however there is room for improvement in terms of higher-order writing skills (e.g. vocabulary and sentence structure). 4) Distinction. Higher-order writing skills are evident in parts. Greater consistency will improve the overall quality of your work. 5) HD. The quality of writing in the report is exceptional. Well done. |
| C. Use of academic Sources
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. Information attributed to academic sources makes no meaningful contribution to the discussion.
2) Pass. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too often it is presented as isolated/individual statements. Work on providing a fuller discussion of the source information and/or using multiple sources to support a particular point of view. 3) Credit. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too much of it is simply replicated from the original source. Work on developing your paraphrasing skills by contextualising the information; i.e. explicitly link it to the focus of your discussion. 4) Distinction. Information from academic sources are effectively weaved into the discussion, thereby helping to describe OC and the strategies for developing it. 5) HD. In addition to the Distinction qualities, a strong effort has also been made to cite empirical research findings that support and complement the discussion. |
| D. Referencing and Formatting
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. The assignment document is unprofessionally presented. For example the required number and type of references are not provided or several formatting features are missing (refer to the assignment guidelines).
2) Pass. Some effort has been made to acknowledge the sources of information in the review but the required referencing style has not been adopted. 3) Credit. Correct referencing style but not all formatting features are adopted. 4) Distinction. The report contains only minor errors with the referencing style and/or formatting features. Proof read the final version of your work to identify and correct these simple errors. 5) HD. The assignment document adopts all the required referencing and formatting features and is professionally presented. |
Previous answers to this question
This is a preview of an assignment submitted on our website by a student. If you need help with this question or any assignment help, click on the order button below and get started. We guarantee authentic, quality, 100% plagiarism free work or your money back.
Get The Answer Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
‘
‘
March 21, 2017
‘
<'">
0
Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
Assignment 1c Guidelines and Marking Criteria
Title: Assignment 1c – Literature Review
Marks: 25 (which is 25% of the unit grade)
Due: Prior to 11pm on Friday 8th April (week 6), 2016.
Task: Undertake a Literature Review (max 1500 words) on ‘Strategies for Building Organisational Commitment’. The review is to focus solely on refereed academic publications (i.e. journal articles).
Purpose: As students of Organisational Behaviour it is important that you are able to effectively identify, collate and disseminate credible information on a range of issues that have strong theoretical and/or practical relevance to the field. Such information will often provide the basis for effective planning and decision-making.
Format: The single document submitted for this assignment is to contain the following components and formatting features:
- Assignment ‘Coversheet’ (document is available in the Assignment file on Blackboard).
- Assignment ‘Coverpage’ identifying the unit name & code, assignment title, student name & ID, and the report word count (note: Reference List content is not included in this count).
- Content; i.e. your Literature Review (maximum of 1500 words).
- Develop a unique Title; one that signals the central theme or focus of the review. Thereafter you can include any subheadings that might help to effectively structure the discussion. No Table of Contents is required.
- Both in-text and reference list skills must be demonstrated (use the Harvard Referencing style).
- The report is to include a minimum of six distinct references from academic journals. You may cite your textbook and sources identified in it but they do not contribute towards the reference count. Quoting is not permitted. Paraphrase the information you obtain from your various sources.
- Reference List.
Adopt the following formatting features for the paper:
- Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after your coverpage.
- Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1½ line spacing.
- Margins – top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page boarders.
- Spelling – if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check.
- Writing and grammar must conform to the standards of a professional report.
Submitting: All assignments are to be submitted through ‘Turn-it-in,’ which can be accessed from the ‘Assignment 1’ folder on Blackboard. The link will be activated in week 4 and you can submit the assignment any time up to the due date.
The file you submit should be labelled in the following manner:
Surname, initial, student code, MNG82210, asmt 1c
For example – Gillett, P, 012345, MNG82210, asmt 1c
Feedback: Students who submit their report by the due date will receive feedback within 2 weeks. This feedback will be in the form of a marking rubric and a copy of your report with electronic comments from the marker.
Marking Criteria:
| A. Content
(weight = 28% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. Much of the information on Organisational Commitment (OC) is inaccurate or the level of detail is insufficient.
2) Pass. The review reflects a basic understanding of OC. Extending the scope of the review would help to demonstrate a deeper level of knowledge. 3) Credit. The review reflects a good effort to effectively discuss OC and the strategies that might be used to develop it. Work on developing your academic skills by synthesising the key information presented in your review, rather than repeating content from individual sources. 4) Distinction. The review scope is sufficiently broad and a good understanding of the OC concept is demonstrated. Further analysis of the key concepts will help to reveal and support the specific intent of your review. 5) HD. The review reflects an extremely strong understanding of OC and the strategies for developing it. The discussion effectively synthesises information from different sources and your strong analysis gives the review a unique and purposeful quality. |
| B. Writing Quality
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. The writing is ineffective due to numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors.
2) Pass. Proof-read the final document to identify and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar. Plan for and undertake additional drafts as this will help to improve the quality of your written work. 3) Credit. A good standard of writing is provided (no spelling errors) however there is room for improvement in terms of higher-order writing skills (e.g. vocabulary and sentence structure). 4) Distinction. Higher-order writing skills are evident in parts. Greater consistency will improve the overall quality of your work. 5) HD. The quality of writing in the report is exceptional. Well done. |
| C. Use of academic Sources
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. Information attributed to academic sources makes no meaningful contribution to the discussion.
2) Pass. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too often it is presented as isolated/individual statements. Work on providing a fuller discussion of the source information and/or using multiple sources to support a particular point of view. 3) Credit. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too much of it is simply replicated from the original source. Work on developing your paraphrasing skills by contextualising the information; i.e. explicitly link it to the focus of your discussion. 4) Distinction. Information from academic sources are effectively weaved into the discussion, thereby helping to describe OC and the strategies for developing it. 5) HD. In addition to the Distinction qualities, a strong effort has also been made to cite empirical research findings that support and complement the discussion. |
| D. Referencing and Formatting
(weight = 24% of marks)
|
1) Unsatisfactory. The assignment document is unprofessionally presented. For example the required number and type of references are not provided or several formatting features are missing (refer to the assignment guidelines).
2) Pass. Some effort has been made to acknowledge the sources of information in the review but the required referencing style has not been adopted. 3) Credit. Correct referencing style but not all formatting features are adopted. 4) Distinction. The report contains only minor errors with the referencing style and/or formatting features. Proof read the final version of your work to identify and correct these simple errors. 5) HD. The assignment document adopts all the required referencing and formatting features and is professionally presented. |