AIM
To critically explore the concept of corporate social responsibility and competing models of ethical strategies, which contribute to effective management.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon the successful completion of this module, the student should be able to demonstrate the ability to:
1. Analyse the stakeholder view in comparison with alternative models including stockholder theories and distinguish between different models of corporate social responsibility (CSR).
2. Explore critically the response of management functions to ethical challenges.
INDICATIVE CONTENT
• The Role and Context of Management, Business and Organisational Ethics: Definitions of ethical behaviour. Values, deontological/teleological models, natural law, utilitarianism, social justice, social contract theories. Analysis of models of ethics in the context of commercial priorities and market forces. Evaluation of the potential of normative business ethics to contemporary business practice.
• Market Ethics: An evaluation of the juxtaposition of ethical behaviour in a commercial or state organisation. Narrow and broad views of the “ethical organisation”. Changes to the capitalist/market environment. The role of the individual in relation to the corporation and society. Competing models of professional responsibility e.g. Carroll’s (2008) Moral-Amoral-Immoral paradigms and De George’s (2004) Myth of the Amoral Professional Manager.
• Models of Corporate Responsibility: Agency theory – stakeholders and the firm. Different perspectives of social responsibility. Theories of business power, the managerial revolution, mechanisms of corporate control, corporate governance, and managerial capitalism v state capitalism etc. Application to private, public and Not-For-Profit organizations. Sternberg (2008), Friedman (2000), Freeman (2011), Porter and Kramer (2011) commentaries on the viability of stakeholder approaches.
• Codes of Ethics: Competing approaches for managing ethical dilemmas. Normative strategies to foster ethical behaviour. Neutral, Omni partial Rule-Making (NORM). Self-regulation v governmental regulation of diverse codes for mangers. The role of professional organisations and the State in relation to enforcing/developing codes. Comparative studies of management ethics in different sectors, industries and contexts.
• The challenge of technology to responsible behaviour in an ethical corporation. Sustainability models applied to diverse corporate structures, in a variety of cultures. Anglo-American, European, Asian and Emerging Economy paradigm comparisons. Internet ethics, new social contracts, global pressures, diversity of cultural mixes, managing difference and sustainable processes. Different ethical contexts of small, medium and large organisations.
• Corporate Social Responsibility in a Global Economy: Moral authority of Transnational Corporate Codes, application to employment policies, consumer protection, environmental standards, political/commercial payments and human rights issues. An evaluation of guidelines for ethical organisations operating in the global market. Issues of sustainability and ecological responsibility. The impact of the Internet on professional practice.
• Regulation and Development of an Organisation’s Ethical Programme: Analysis of the arguments for and against external/self -regulation of corporations. Evaluation of theoretical and practical models of organizational ethical initiatives. Corporate accountability perspectives. Corporate citizenship in the context of Anglo-American and European perspectives. The impact of ethical strategies on functional responsibilities.
• Sustainable development: global, national and local issues- Analysis of the changing demands of markets, society, government and wider stakeholders and organisational goals and responses. Evaluation of governmental initiatives: Kolkata Government urban pollution/emissions control, South Korean integrated green and growth strategy, the West Coast initiative in the USA, EU TEEB and UN bio diversity and renewable energy policies, the UK Climate Change Act and the aftermath of the Kyoto Protocol. Strategy embracing sustainability as an intrinsic goal changing maximisation targets to optimisation of societal contribution. Features of a sustainable strategy. Evaluation of the critics of sustainability’s increasing importance.
LEARNING AND TEACHING STRATEGY
This module attempts to engage students in an interactive approach to application of concepts to current management ethical challenges. Presentation of ideas will be accompanied by case material for wider discussion. There will be extensive utilisation of comparative business and social cultural analysis. While maintaining the integrity of positivist approaches, normative discussion will be integrated to rehearse emotional and emotive qualities in class discussion. A current application will be agreed e.g. ethical banking, protection of children in a commercial environment, international business CSR, e-business ethics, developing sustainability strategies, etc. Guest speakers and Business School research students will present their experience and policies on the theme. In order to develop case material students will negotiate a particular application of models to the case they wish to investigate. While the collection of secondary data will be essential, the opportunity to collect primary data will be encouraged (and underpinning skill development practiced) as an aid to achieve the highest grades. It is also hoped to collaborate with other modules in the portfolio at level 5 and as a support for future level 6 study, to enable chosen themes to be studied from several perspectives and to enable deeper analysis at level 6.
Allocation of teaching to deliver the module are:
Activity type Hours Percentage
Scheduled learning 50 25%
Independent learning 150 75%
TOTAL 200 100%
ASSESSMENT
Assessment Component 1 – 50%
Management Report (2000 words).
Write a report to evaluate the main ethical drivers on organisations in the context of their business/social environment. Students will be asked to critique a key academic article and apply it to a sector which they will negotiate with tutors. Gather published literature relating to their allocated topic. The literature should be relevant, credible and current. Students will analyse the literature to produce an evaluative management report on the topic, the production of which will incorporate academic referencing and report writing convention. Students will be expected to present their preparation for the report in the second half of the delivery time as a class discussion/seminar.
Exemplar:
Following research of CSR models, apply to a specific organisation or critically review the implementation of a development programme to enhance CSR performance. The task must be negotiated with the tutor in session 4, communicate the nature of the reform you seek to advocate. This may take the form of a poster display in allocation organised by the tutor, the construction of a website to advocate the reform or a viral/email campaign. In addition to the tangible communications material (poster, website, digital communications medium, you should offer an oral commentary on how your reform respects the needs of stakeholders, the environment and strategic objectives of the host organisation. Following the demonstration you will write a reflective commentary summarising your experience of researching and delivering the reform proposal.
Assessment Component 2 – 50%
Design a mini research project (2000 words) to apply models to specific organisations or management functional specialism. Critically review the incentives to achieve and positive outcomes of green reform and how it might be communicated to a critical public audience.
Exemplar:
Evaluate a relevant campaign, media story, company development programme or ethical management model to apply to a case of policy development or a specific management function, to be negotiated with the tutor. Demonstrate how the industry will have to evolve new systems, “products”, mechanisms for delivery and management processes to achieve sustainable goals. Collection of primary data will be encouraged however deep analysis of secondary data will also generate the highest grades.
Assessment Summary
Activity type Percentage
Report 50%
Case development, analysis and commentary 50%
TOTAL 100%
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Essential
Bowie, N. & Werhane, P. (2004) Management Ethics, Oxford, Blackwell
Crane, A. & Matten, D. (2012) Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization, Oxford, Oxford University Press
Recommended
Ghiller, A. (2013) Business ethics now, New York, McGraw Hill
Henriques, A. & Richardson, J. Eds. (2004) The Triple Bottom Line, does it all add up? Assessing the sustainability of business and CSR, Sterling VA, Earthscan
Smith, N.C. & Lenssen, G. (2009) Mainstreaming Corporate Responsibility, Chichester, Wiley
Sun W., Stewart J. & Pollard, (2010) D. Reframing Corporate Social Responsibility (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability, London, Emerald Publishing Limited
Sybille S. & Edwin Rühli, E. (2011) Stakeholders Matter: A New Paradigm for Strategy in Society (Business, Value Creation and Society), Cambridge, CUP
Tavani, H.T. (2012) Study Guide for Ethics and Technology: Ethical Issues in an Age of Information and Communication Technology, Danvers, MA
Background
Clegg, S. R. & Rhodes, C. (2006) Management Ethics: Contemporary Contexts, London, Routledge
Carroll, A. & Bucholtz, A. (2014) Business and Society: Stakeholder Management, Los Angeles, South Western
Chryssides, G. & Kaler J. (2011) Introduction to Business Ethics, London, Thompson Business Press
Ferrell, O.C.. (2013) Study Guide for Business Ethics: Ethical Decision-Making and Cases, New York, Houghton/Mifflin
Fisher, C. & Lovell, A. (2012) Business Ethics and Values, Individual, Corporate and International Perspectives, London, FT/Prentice Hall
Hosmer, T. (2011) The Ethics of Management: A multi disciplinary approach, New York, McGraw Hill
Vallabhaneni, S. R. (2008) Corporate Management, Governance and Ethics Best Practices, New York, Wiley & Sons
Weiss, J.W. (2012) Business Ethics, a stakeholder and issues management approach, New York, Thompson Learning
Journals
Business & Professional Ethics
Business and Society Review
Business Ethics – A European Review
Business Ethics Quarterly
Environment Policy and Practice
Ethical Consumer
Ethical Performance
Journal of Business Ethics
Websites
www.bsr.orgwww.business-ethics.com
www.ethics.org/etwork
www.ethics.ubc.ca
www.etnor.org/eben
www.gci.org.uk
www.strategyandbusiness.com
www.mckinseyquarterly.com
BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION
Student name:
Student P number:
Programme: BA Portfolio
Module: Management Ethics Module Level (4, 5, 6): 5
Module code: Contribution to Overall
Module Assessment (%): 100%
Lecturer: Internal Verifier:
Assignment Title: Critical discussion of CSR Theory Assignment No (x of x): 1 of 2
Hand Out Date: Submission deadline:
Referencing: In the main body of your submission you must give credit to authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year of publication, title of book, edition, publisher: place of publication).
Disclosure:
I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I have acknowledged all materials used from the published or unpublished works of other people. All references have been duly cited.
Student’s Signature:
Assignments will not be accepted without a signature here
Date:
Turnitin: Lecturer to tick to indicate if an electronic version of the assignment must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: the Turnitin version is the only submission and acts as a receipt for the student.
Late submission: Late submission penalties must be applied to work that is not submitted by the published deadline as follows: up to 4 weeks late: maximum mark of 40% for first attempts; 0% for re-assessment. These penalties may be lifted only with the approval of the Extenuating Circumstances Panel (see Chapter 13 of the Academic Quality Handbook which can be found clicking on this link http://www.uwtsd.ac.uk/academic-office/). Work cannot be accepted more than 4 weeks after the submission deadline and must be recorded as a non-submission.
Feedback: Please note the following extract from the Academic Quality Handbook (page 110 7.12). “marking of students’ work must be completed no later than 20 clear term-time working days after its submission and students must be provided with provisional feedback within the same time scale”.
Therefore students can expect provisional feedback accordingly.
Extenuating circumstances: The University recognises that, on occasion, exceptional or ‘extenuating’ circumstances such as illness or bereavement may affect a student’s ability to meet deadlines. Arrangements are in place to ensure that, where such circumstances exist, the student is not unfairly penalised. The arrangements are designed to ensure that students across the University are treated equally, regardless of their Programme of Study or Faculty. It is essential that you familiarise yourself with the University’s regulations relating to extenuating circumstances and the accompanying guidance, which are set out in Chapter 7 of the Academic Quality Handbook (AQH) at http://www.trinitysaintdavid.ac.uk/en/media/uniweb/content/documents/departments/qualityassuranceunit/academicqualityhandbook/Chapter_07_General_Assessment_Policy_Taught_Programmes_Pages_87-152.pdf and supporting documents published on the University website.
You should note in particular the sorts of events that are not normally accepted as being extenuating circumstances, such as loss of work as a result of theft or computer breakdown, and take the necessary steps to protect against such circumstances arising.
Please note that Programme Directors and module tutors are not permitted to extend deadlines for individual students – if you believe that you have extenuating circumstances, you must follow the procedure set out in the regulations. Further advice is available from Student Services.
YES ?
NO
Learning Outcomes tested
(from module syllabus) Assessment Criteria To achieve each outcome a student must demonstrate the ability to:
1. Evaluate critical approaches when studying management theory and practice.
• Write a report to evaluate the main ethical drivers on organisations in the context of their business/social environment.
2. Judge dispassionately the differences between mainstream and critical theories of management and develop critical or ethical assessments of concepts underpinning management theory.
• Analyse the literature to produce an evaluative management report on the topic, the production of which will incorporate academic referencing and report writing convention.
TASK DESCRIPTION
Choice of Case Organisation
You may choose your own case to critically analyse issues of business ethics. However this case must be agreed with your tutor, before you start the answer. The final date for this agreement will be week 3 of the semester. If you do not agree your own case, you must use the case company material provided. Non negotiated case applications will be failed. In your negotiation you must demonstrate (and provide evidence of your research) that your case has sufficient depth to analyse economic concepts and that you have sufficient access to material of level 5 academic worth. Wikipedia must NOT be quoted but can be used as a finding resource.
You will be issued background material and supportive articles. These should be downloaded from Moodle and read. You will be alerted to the specific class exercises, which require you to present your ideas on the mainstream and critical theories of management and develop critical or ethical assessments of concepts underpinning management theory.
Thorough analysis with concepts and theories applied to the organisation(s) will achieve higher grades.
The question to be answered
Instructions
a. Critically analyse the idea of sustainability for a business that you have studied. 50%
b. Apply this analysis to review the resulting challenges faced by the organisation and its policies. 50%
2000 words (100%)
Report style- please follow advice in the teaching sessions
Grade criteria
40-49%: Knowledge of organisations with conflicting views of CSR performance. Ability to communicate some factors relevant to the organisation’s mission and promotion strategy. Understanding of poster communication as a medium for influencing opinion.
50-59%: Evaluation of different perspectives of CSR held by organisations in conflict. Ability to anticipate the audience’s reaction to messages contained on the poster and in answer to questions. Sensitivity to poster imagery in promoting messages.
60-69%: Critical appraisal of models utilised to promote organisation’s policies. Evaluation of alternative models to reference messages and promotional arguments.
70%+: Deeper understanding of wider implications of conflicting debate on a theme relevant to CSR in the context of the case industry selected. Ability to empathise with alternative means of expression and value judgement systems.
Preparation for the task:
1. Lectures and tutorials will delineate theoretical perspectives on CSR and discuss possible case material.
2. Posters are increasingly being used at academic conferences to display the results of research or to communicate the key themes of research being undertaken. There is a great skill in identifying what is most important about a topic and how to communicate this to an audience.
3. Students are expected to research past conflicting cases in academic journals to identify key concepts and communication strategies.
4. Tutors from the Faculty of Art and Design will present a lecture on the use of posters as a communication medium. This will include the importance of text, imagery, colours and format. Business students are not expected to be artists. Therefore no aesthetic judgements will be made. However the effectiveness of communication and the knowledge of what the objectives of format selection and the alternative interpretations will contribute to the grade.
5. In week 4 you must agree as a pair and with the tutors what your case will be. In week 6 you must present to the class a brief account of your poster plan and the underpinning rationale. Your tutors do not want you to feel constrained, indeed we want you to consider radical ways to communicate, however to protect you and the reputation of the University these sessions, in addition to the guidance given, will determine some unacceptable approaches, which you should not adopt.
GUIDANCE FOR STUDENTS IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS
NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five common assessment criteria overleaf.
1. Research-informed Literature
Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set. You should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial; these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks, current news articles, organisational documents, and websites. You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic journals are normally highly credible sources while websites require careful consideration/selection and should be used sparingly. Any sources you use should be current and up-to-date, mostly published within the last five years or so, though seminal/important works in the field may be older. You must provide evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work, using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please use the Harvard referencing system.
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the subject area. Knowledge relates to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through your learning. You demonstrate your understanding by interpreting the meaning of the facts and information (knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc. appropriate to the task(s) set. You should be able to explain the theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your understanding. Your mark/grade will also depend upon the extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed, with comprehensive coverage.
3. Analysis
Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and break information down into parts, make inferences, compile, compare and contrast information. This means not just describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who? Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your arguments and judgements. Evidence that you have reflected upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work. Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data and concepts. Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must be derived from the content of your work. There should be no new information presented within your conclusion. Where relevant, alternative solutions and recommendations may be proposed.
4. Practical Application and Deployment
You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular context. How do they work in practice? You will deploy models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative and creative. This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of real world examples and cases, the application of a model within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation against others based on stated criteria. You should show awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when applied in particular contexts.
5. Skills for Professional Practice
Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in professional practice. This includes demonstrating your individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report, presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in presentation and organisation.
Specific to this assignment:
The student will be required to submit a report.
Essential Resources:
• Resources listed on the lecture schedule and on Moodle
• The student handbook
• The UWTSD website at http://www.uwtsd.ac.uk/academicskills/
MARKING CRITERIA AND STUDENT FEEDBACK
This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Common Assessment Criteria Applied Marks available Marks
awarded
1. Research-informed Literature
Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions. 10
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline. 30
3. Analysis
Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence 30
4. Practical Application and Deployment
Deployment of methods, materials, tools and techniques; application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems. 20
5. Skills for Professional Practice
Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and organisation. 10
Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. ) Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate) %
Up to one-week late ?
Over one week late ?
COMMON ASSESSMENT AND MARKING CRITERIA
OUTRIGHT FAIL UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT EXCEPTIONAL
Assessment Criteria 0-29% 30-39%* 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
1. Research-informed Literature
Extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions Little or no evidence of reading.
Views and findings unsupported and non-authoritative.
Referencing conventions largely ignored. Poor evidence of reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources.
Referencing conventions used inconsistently. References to a limited range of mostly relevant sources. Some omissions and minor errors.
Referencing conventions evident though not always applied consistently. Inclusion of a range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions mostly consistently applied. Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently.
Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of referencing conventions, consistently applied. A comprehensive range of research informed literature embedded in the work. Excellent selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills, consistently applied. Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Outstanding selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills consistently and professionally applied.
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline. Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level. Substantial inaccuracies. Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial understanding. Some significant inaccuracies. Evidence of basic knowledge and understanding of the relevant concepts and underlying principles. Knowledge is accurate with a good understanding of the field of study. Knowledge is extensive. Exhibits understanding of the breadth and depth of established views. Excellent knowledge and understanding of the main concepts and key theories. Clear awareness of challenges to established views and the limitations of the knowledge base. Highly detailed knowledge and understanding of the main theories/concepts, and a critical awareness of the ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.
3. Analysis
Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/ missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise or evaluate. Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and contradictory. Generalised statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance. Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and some attempts to synthesise, albeit with some weaknesses.
Some evidence to support findings/ views, but evidence not consistently interpreted.
Some relevant conclusions and recommendations, where relevant Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance.
An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support the argument.
Valid conclusions and recommendations, where relevant Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence. Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and convincingly.
Sound, convincing conclusions / recommendations. Thoroughly logical work, supported by evaluated evidence. High quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration.
Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions.
Strong, persuasive, conclusions, justifiable recommendations. Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration.
Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions.
Highly persuasive conclusions
4. Practical Application and Deployment
Effective deployment of appropriate methods, materials, tools and techniques; extent of skill demonstrated in the application of concepts to a variety of processes and/or contexts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems. Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Little or no appreciation of the context of the application. Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed appreciation of the context of the application.
An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of well established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Basic appreciation of the context of the application.
A good and appropriate application of standard methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Good appreciation of the context of the application, with some use of examples, where relevant.
A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Very good consideration of the context of the application, with perceptive use of examples, where relevant.
Evidence of some innovation and creativity. An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
The context of the application is well considered, with extensive use of relevant examples.
Application and deployment extend beyond established conventions. Innovation and creativity evident throughout. Outstanding levels of application and deployment skills. Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and techniques.
5. Skills for Professional Practice
Demonstrates attributes expected in professional practice including: individual initiative and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media to communicate (including written and oral); clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation. Communication media is inappropriate or misapplied.
Little or no evidence of autonomy in the completion of tasks.
Work is poorly structured and/or largely incoherent. Media is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.
Poor independent or collaborative initiative.
Work lacks structure, organisation, and/or coherence Can communicate in a suitable format but with some room for improvement.
Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in group activities.
Work lacks coherence in places and could be better structured. Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have minor errors.
Can work effectively as part of a team, with clear contribution to group activities.
Mostly coherent work and is in a suitable structure. Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a suitable format.
Can work very well as part of a team, with very good contribution to group activities.
Work is coherent and fluent and is well structured and organised. Can communicate professionally and, confidently in a suitable format.
Can work professionally within a team, showing leadership skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting obligations.
Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally. Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of professionalism.
Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team, showing advanced leadership skills.
Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.
Student Self Evaluation Form
Student name: Student P number:
Programme: Year of programme
Assignment Title:
This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.
Common Assessment Criteria Applied Level of Achievement
REFER
3rd
2:2
2:1
1st
1st
OUTRIGHT FAIL UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT EXCEPTIONAL
1. Research-informed Literature
0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject 0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
3. Analysis
0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
4. Practical Application and Deployment
0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
5. Skills for Professional Practice
0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-100%
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS YOU FEEL THAT YOU NEED TO DEVELOP
Student’s Name Date
Student’s Signature
24/7 online - 
1-316-444-1378 or 44-141-628-6690
Login
August 8th, 2017 
admin 
Posted in Uncategorized 