Report 10,000 words, excluding 1000 word Executive Summary and 3000 word, Reflective Learning Statement.

Overall Weighting

100% of the final mark

Your work must have also been submitted to TurnitIn our plagiarism checker. This can be found on the NX0320 Blackboard

site in the Assessment and Submission section .

Assessment Specification

The final report will critically evaluate the activities undertaken and outcomes achieved in planning, implementing and

evaluating the professional project proposal.

Successful reports generally address both of these foci and usually follow a structure similar to the one below,

generating clear links between each of the sections.

Suggested report structure

Title )
Acknowledgements ) not included in the word count
Table of Contents or Index )
The table of contents/index should provide details of all the contents in your report (including Appendices)
Template for these introductory pages can be found on the e-learning portal.

Executive Summary separate word count of 1000 words)
This section should provide a summary of the overall project: its rationale, aims and intended outcomes; a review of

relevant underpinning theories, frameworks and principles; the methodology planned and undertaken; project outcomes;

reflections; conclusions and recommendations for personal and organizational practice.

Introduction, Aims and Objectives (weighting 15%)
This section should provide a brief background to give the reader enough information to understand the context in which

the project has been carried out. A rationale should also be included here. Explain why you selected this topic for your

project.

Details of your aims and outcomes should be listed and discussed in this section to enable the reader to make links

between context, rationale and intentions of the project.

Literature Review (weighting 20%)
In this section you should make a critical evaluation of, and demonstrate application to your project of, theories,

frameworks and principles, drawn from a range of relevant and appropriately referenced academic and practitioner

literature. You must demonstrated wide reading from a range of sources.

Methodology (weighting 15%)
In this section you should supply information about how you planned and carried out your project.
Demonstrating your understanding and reading of research methods you must discuss your chosen research philosophy,

methodology and methods.

Discuss how you gathered information, what hurdles you overcame, why you approached the project in the way you did e.g.

questionnaire rather that interview.. You should provide enough information to tell the story of how you planned and

carried out your project.

This might include details of who else was involved in the project from conception to conclusion. Did you need to seek

approval/permission to undertake the project; did other people provide data, information, knowledge or time? Where did you

get information about the topic? When did the investigation happen? (Did you have a timetable or schedule and did the

project fit in with your original plans?)

It is important you discuss how you ensured your project was aligned to the ethical requirements of NBS and University

guidelines. Remember to include signed documents relating to informed consent from an organizational and individual

perspective.
You should discuss the importance of research ethics, approaches to ensure research was carried out in an ethical manner

and detailed discussion of how you have ensure ethical research. This section should be a minimum of 500 words.

Findings, Analysis and Applicability (weighting 20%)
Findings: In this section you should provide an account of your primary research findings.

Analysis and Applicability: This analysis should demonstrate an understanding of the facts, principles, and opinions

acquired through undertaking primary data. It is important that you evidence appropriate inferences from the data

analysis.

Synthesis and Conclusion (weighting 20%)
Ensure that you draw together relevant theory with the data gathered to demonstrate a depth and breadth of understanding.

Evaluate and summarise your work-based project. Discussion should draw together key points and issues identified in

earlier sections of the report, and the need for further research should be recognised and stated.

Executive Summary, Presentation, Structure and Personal and Organisational Reflective Statements (weighting 10%)

You should ensure your report is free from spelling, punctuation and grammatical error and that your writing style is

detached and passive (remember to write in the 3rd person). The layout and format must be consistent with project

guidelines. It is important that you demonstrate engagement with the supervision process – this will be assessed via

completion of your project logbook, so it is important that you and your supervisor maintain accurate records of your

discussions. In addition to those elements previously mentioned, personal and organizational reflection is also considered

as part of your final mark.

Personal Reflection (put this in appendix 1 – separate word count of 3000 words)
Complete a personal reflection of your learning journey this academic year. What competences have you developed, which

areas could be further improved. Consider implications for further academic study and career progression.

Complete a personal reflection of how your employer or potential future employer may benefit/has benefitted from your

studies over the past academic year.

Assessment Criteria:

The report will be assessed on the

• Extent of achievement of objectives and intended outcomes, reviewed in a critical, analytical and evaluative manner.
• Understanding and application of a range of referenced theoretical concepts and resources, gained from additional and

relevant reading
• Justification of methods used, together with a consideration of limitations and of possible alternatives
• Extent and depth of reflection on the project
• Reasonable and logical conclusions and specific, clear and feasible recommendations
• Structure, conciseness, presentation and accurate referencing, using the Harvard system

Assessment B Marking Criteria

Mark General Criteria Module Assessment Criteria
First
(80 – 100) Exceptional scholarship for subject. Outstanding ability to apply, in the right measure, the skills necessary

to achieve highly sophisticated and fluent challenges to received wisdom. Excellent articulation of dissertation topic.

Excellent level of analysis from a critical perspective. Clear interpretation and critique of research findings against

models and theories. Robust recommendations based upon critical analysis. Provides evidence of extensive reflection and

learning.
First
(70 – 79) Knowledge and understanding is comprehensive both as to breadth and depth. A mature ability to critically

appreciate concepts and their inter-relationship is demonstrated. Clear evidence of independent thought. Presentation of

work is fluent, focused and accurate. Succinct formulation of the dissertation topic. Impressive level of analysis from a

critical perspective. Research findings and theory clearly interwoven. Provides evidence of considerable reflection and

learning.
Upper Second (60 – 69) Knowledge base is up-to-date and relevant, but also may be broad or deep. Higher order critical

appreciation skills are displayed. A significant ability to apply theory, concepts, ideas and their inter-relationship is

illustrated Clear articulation of the dissertation topic supported by relevant research and theoretical analysis. Provides

evidence of reasonable reflection and learning.
Lower Second (50 – 59) Sound comprehension of topic. Reasoning and argument are generally relevant but not necessarily

extensive. Awareness of concepts and critical appreciation are apparent, but the ability to conceptualise, and/or to apply

theory is slightly limited. Clear articulation of the dissertation topic. Research findings and relation to theory clear

in most areas. Provides evidence of acceptable level reflection and learning.
Third
(40 – 49) Knowledge is adequate but limited and/or superficial. In the most part, description/assertion rather than

argument or logical reasoning is used. Insufficient focus is evident in work presented. Descriptive piece detailing the

dissertation topic. Portrayal of the analysis rather unsophisticated. Methods of research are loosely applied to the

theoretical concepts. Generally lacking focus. Provides evidence of limited reflection and learning.
(30 – 39) Minimal awareness of subject area. Communication of knowledge frequently inarticulate and/or irrelevant.

Incoherent description relating to the topic. Research methods, findings and analysis lacking coherence.
(0 – 29) Poor grasp of topic concepts or of awareness of what concepts are. Failure to apply relevant skills. Work is

inarticulate and/or incomprehensible. Irrelevant and inaccurate topic. Report muddled and vague. Fails to provide evidence

of reflection or learning.