Recent Question/Assignment

Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
Assignment 1 Part C Guidelines and Marking Criteria
Title: Assignment 1 Part C – Literature Review
Marks: 20 (which is 20% of the unit grade)
Due: Prior to 11pm Fri 27th April, 2018 (Week 8).
Task: Undertake a Literature Review (max 1500 words) on – Employee Engagement: what does the literature say?
The review is to focus solely on refereed academic publications (i.e. journal articles).
Note: students should make themselves fully aware of the penalties that may be applied for cases of Academic Misconduct, such as submitting work that is not their own. Access this document for further information.
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:
a) Assignment ‘Coversheet’ (document is in the Assessment Details tab on Blackboard).
b) Assignment ‘Coverpage’ - identifying the unit name & code, assignment title, student name & ID, and the word count of the review. This is a document that students develop themselves; i.e. there is no Coverpage template. Note: Reference List content is not included in the word count.
c) Content; i.e. your Literature Review (maximum of 1500 words). Reviews that exceed 1500 words will be returned to the student for editing and resubmission.
i. Develop a ‘catchy’ 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.
ii. In-text and Reference List skills must be demonstrated (use the School-preferred referencing style).
iii. 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 only permitted when providing the definition of a concept. Paraphrase all other information that you obtain from your various sources.
d) Reference List.
Adopt the following formatting features for the paper:
o Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after your coverpage.
o Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1½ line spacing.
o Margins – top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page boarders.
o Spelling - if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check.
o 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 3 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 = 25% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. Much of the information on Employee Engagement is inaccurate or the level of detail is insufficient.
2) Pass. The review reflects a basic understanding of EE. Extending the scope of the review will help to demonstrate a deeper level of knowledge.
3) Credit. The review scope is sufficiently broad and a good understanding of EE is demonstrated. At times the specific focus of your review (what you want to say about EE) is unclear or changes tack.
4) Distinction. The review effectively describes EE and its influence on Organisational outcomes. Further analysis of the key concepts will help to support the particular focus of your review.
5) HD. The review reflects an extremely strong understanding of EE and its influence on Organisational outcomes. Your strong analysis gives the review a unique and purposeful quality.
B. Writing Quality
(weight = 25% 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 = 25% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. Information which clearly comes from other published sources is not cited or information that is cited makes no meaningful contribution to the discussion.
2) Pass. The information in your review is appropriately cited 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.
3) Credit. A good effort has been made to synthesise information from different sources to support or explain a particular point. Work on further developing the quality and/or consistency of this strong academic work.
4) Distinction. Information from academic sources are effectively weaved into the discussion, thereby helping to fully describe the EE concept and its influence on Organisational outcomes.
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 = 25% of marks)
1) Unsatisfactory. The assignment document is unprofessionally presented and/or the required number of references are not provided.
2) Pass. The assignment document meets a satisfactory standard of presentation but several (at least 2) formatting features have not been adopted and there are errors with the referencing style.
3) Credit. Several (at least 2) formatting features have not been adopted or there are errors with the referencing style.
4) Distinction. One formatting feature has not been adopted or there is a notable error with the referencing style.
5) HD. The assignment document adopts all the required referencing and formatting features and is professionally presented.
A. 1 3 3.5 4 5
B. 1 3 3.5 4 5
C. 1 3 3.5 4 5
D. 1 3 3.5 4 5