BUS80017 Quantitative Research Methods
Semester 1, 2019
Individual Assignment (40%) to be submitted electronically only
Due Date June 3, 2019: 10 am
(electronic cover sheet required)
Using the original MIX Market data file used for your Group Assignment and the GDP growth data you collected for that Assignment, you are to replicate to the extent possible the multivariate analysis conducted by Lopatta et al. (2017). Please do this for as many microfinance institutions in as many countries (NOT regions) as possible but for only one year. You will be allocated a year to analyse. You are not expected to gather more data so exclude any variables used by Lopatta et al., 2017 that you do not have or cannot construct.
You are to write up your results as though your article is to be submitted to the same journal as Lopatta et al. (2017), introducing your topic and stating your hypothesis or hypotheses, but NOT developing a theoretical framework or conducting a review of the relevant literature. The Research Method, Results and Conclusion sections are the primary focus of your write-up. You are not expected to provide a reference list. Both univariate and multivariate results and discussion thereof pertinent to the data you use and your analysis should be included. Please document any assumptions you make. Footnotes can be used to do this if including assumptions in the narrative would impede the flow of your argument or the realism of your article replication.
A marking rubric is attached. No word limit is specified, but editors of journals are always looking to save space, so do not use more words than you need to get the task done.
Reference:
Lopatta, Tchikov, Jaeschke & Lodhia (2017) Sustainable Development and Microfinance: The Effect of Outreach and Profitability on Microfinance Institutions' Development Mission. Sustainable Development. Sep/Oct2017, Vol. 25 Issue 5, p386-399.
1
BUS80017 Assignment 2 (Individual) Marking Rubric
The criteria No pass Pass
50-59% Credit
60-69% Distinction 70-79% High distinction 80-100%
Presentation (20%)
Editing, grammar, punctuation, roleplaying, structure Did not meet the criteria. Acceptable standard of presentation with clear communication. Good standard of presentation, including editing, grammar, punctuation, roleplaying and structure. Clear communication of ideas. High standard of presentation, including editing, grammar, punctuation, roleplaying and structure. Excellent communication of ideas. Excellent standard of presentation,
including editing, grammar, punctuation, roleplaying and structure.
Outstanding communication of ideas.
Quality of
Univariate and
Multivariate
Analysis Tables
(20%) Did not meet the criteria. Acceptable quality. Some key features missed. Good quality. Includes most key features. Excellent quality. Includes all key features. Clearly worded and displayed. Outstanding quality. Concisely worded and displayed with all key features included.
Quality of narrative explanation of univariate and multivariate analysis (50%)
Did not meet the criteria. Basic explanation. Flow of argument patchy.
Assumptions not well explained. Clear explanation. Flow of argument adequate.
Assumptions adequately explained. Excellent quality of explanation. Clear and coherent argument throughout. Assumptions adequately explained. Outstanding quality of explanation.
Clear and coherent argument throughout.
Assumptions comprehensively explained.
Quality of conclusion
(10%) Did not meet the criteria. Basic explanation. Flow of argument patchy.
Assumptions not well explained. Clear explanation. Flow of argument adequate.
Assumptions adequately explained. Excellent quality of explanation. Clear and coherent argument throughout. Assumptions adequately explained. Outstanding quality of explanation.
Clear and coherent argument throughout.
Assumptions comprehensively explained.
2