The Newcastle Business School Masters Dissertation

ASSESSMENT BRIEF – LD0480 The Newcastle Business School Masters Dissertation

Programme:

MSc Business with Pathways

Module Code:

LD0480

Module Title:

The Newcastle Business School Masters Dissertation

Module Tutor Name(s):

Dr. Sumesh DADWAL

Internal Moderator

Dr. Claire Cook

Academic Year:

2019-20

Coursework Title:

Research Proposal and Masters Dissertation

% Weighting (to the overall module):

Assessment Component 1: Dissertation Proposal Report (15%)

Assessment Component 2: Masters Dissertation (85%)

Distributed on:

Teaching Week 1 (via the e-learning portal)

Date and Time of Submission by Student:

Assessment Component 1: Submitted in 8th Week in the second semester of the students

Assessment Component 2: Submitted on TBC

Submission of Assessment

Assessment Component 1: Dissertation Proposal Report must be submitted to Turnitin link via Module Blackboard site.

Assessment Component 2: Masters Dissertation must be submitted to Turnitin link via Module Blackboard site

Both Assessment components must be submitted electronically online via Turnitin by the given deadline. You will find a Turnitin link on the module’s help site.

It is your responsibility to ensure that your assignment arrives before the submission deadline stated above. See the University policy on late submission of work (the relevant extract is set out below).This assignment will not be marked anonymously. You must write your name and organisation on your assignment.

Grading

This grading rubric is used to grade the student’s work. Students are required to achieve a mark of 50% or above, to pass this module. Both the components must be completed to pass the module. A pass mark for the dissertation can be used to compensate a fail mark for the proposal. Provided the dissertation is passed with a mark of 50% or more, when the composite mark results in an overall mark of less than 50%, a mark of 50% will be awarded for the module.

Date by which Work, Feedback and Marks will be returned to Students:

Within 20 working days after the submission date.

The mechanism for the return of assignment work, feedback and marks to students:

Formal feedback will be made available via Blackboard following completion of all reviews and internal moderation of results.

DISSERTATION LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the completion of the Masters Dissertation module, students will be able to:

1. Plan and complete a major research project on a contemporary business, financial, management or leadership topic and organise the findings into a comprehensive and explicit structure that is critically assessed and is linked to the conclusions drawn;

2. Demonstrate skills of analysis and synthesis in the selection and application of appropriate research methodology and method(s) to their chosen research topic;


3. Demonstrate an understanding of the impact of innovative and contemporary research on the business and management community.;

4. Critically reflect on the processes involved in the research, including reflection upon their own ethical values and the contribution of the research to the topic area;

5. Acquire, interpret and apply specialist functional knowledge in relation to their programme of study (specialist programmes only).

Students will also illustrate and document progress within the dissertation process by providing an adequate set of working papers and log book.

Masters’ Programme Goals and Objectives

Goal 1: To develop the skills necessary for employment and career progression

Demonstrate awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses and the ability to engage in continuing self-development

1.2        Demonstrate the development of  inter-personal and intra-personal skills

1.3        Demonstrate competence in contemporary analytical and ICT applications    

Goal 2: Be culturally and ethically aware

2.1        Demonstrate their ability to work in culturally diverse groups and teams and make appropriate an personal contribution to team effectiveness

2.2        Reflect on their own ethical values

2.3        Understand the wider impact of individual or organisational decision making on social and environmental contexts

Goal 3: Have developed leadership and management capability

3.1        Analyse and communicate complex issues effectively

3.2        Demonstrate decision making, problem solving and project management skills

Goal 4: Have developed and applied knowledge of international business and management theory

4.1        Acquire, interpret and apply knowledge of international business, management and organisational functions

4.2        Demonstrate an understanding of the impact of innovative and contemporary research on the business and management community

4.3        Acquire, interpret and apply specialist functional knowledge in relation to their programme of study (specialist programmes only)

Goal 5: Have developed a range of research skills and project capabilities

5.1        Plan and complete a major piece of research or project on a contemporary business, financial, management or leadership topic

5.2       Demonstrate skills of analysis and synthesis in the application of research methods to the exploration of contemporary business and management issues.

DISSERTATION PROCESS

The Masters dissertation begins with ‘Dissertation preparation and research methods’ in the first semester. This will cover research methods that you will use in your dissertation. Towards the end of the first semester there will be subject specialist presentations from the different subject groups in the Business School and consultation sessions to help you decide on a dissertation topic. Materials to support your dissertation studies will be available on the LD0422 eLP site.

All students completing a dissertation are required to submit a Dissertation Research Proposal Form to the Blackboard link – the deadline for this and other information to help you put together your proposal will be available from the eLP site. The proposal will be marked and it is worth 15% of the final dissertation module mark.

Once a supervisor has been assigned, students can meet with their supervisor to get feedback on their proposal. Students must then work under the guidance of their supervisor to complete the dissertation. Students will need to arrange to see their supervisor on a regular basis so that steady progress can be made over the course of the dissertation process.

Any queries relating to this assignment should be directed to the module tutor:

[email protected]

ASSESSMENTS

The assessment has two components.

Assessment Component 1: Dissertation Proposal Report (3000 words, weighted 15% of the module)

Assessment Component 2: Masters Dissertation (weighted 85% of the module).

TOPIC SELECTION

Selection of a suitable dissertation topic rests with the student. The student cannot be required by a member of staff to undertake a topic that is not acceptable to the student. Ideas for topics can be gleaned from many sources. Work placement experiences, aspired career paths, course work and readings are just a few. Start thinking early about potential topics that interest you. Copies of previous Masters dissertations are available for inspection via the eLP; consult these to see what previous students have done.

Your dissertation should describe an original piece of work undertaken by yourself. The topic needs to be related to business or management or to the specific named degree the student is studying. You may have come across the phrase ‘addressing a gap in the literature’ but this applies most strongly to doctoral level research. At Masters level your research may be investigating a business (or accounting) issue that has been studied by others, but you should still produce a critical literature review and obtain/analyse some data. It is the student’s responsibility to verify that the title and the approach of the dissertation are original. However, a student may not claim exclusive rights to a topic area.

Students can assume that the topic as initially conceived may evolve as the dissertation progresses. By ‘evolve’ it is meant that the particular aspect of the topic which becomes central to the dissertation may well change in one direction or another as the dissertation progresses. This evolution or “fine tuning” of a topic is quite usual and should be expected. The goal is to find a topic which is general enough to be significant, but specific enough to become focused. A common problem is to have the scope of the work too wide so that the work is not sufficiently focussed to allow successful completion with the resources available

Submission Of The Topic And Supervision Allocation :

Each student should submit his/ her proposed topic using the prescribed form .

The research topic must be close to your pathways of the study.

The Dissertation Research Proposal Form must be submitted as a soft copy to the Turnitin link of LD0422 under the Blackboard.

The submission date(s) for the proposal will be announced on the eLP.

A team of academic will allocate you a supervisor as per your topic, expertise of the faculty and resources availability.

ASSESSMENT COMPONENT 1: DISSERTATION PROPOSAL REPORT (3000 WORDS, WEIGHTED 15% OF THE MODULE)

SUBMISSION OF DISSERTATION PROPOSAL AND SUPERVISOR ALLOCATION

At the end of the first semester, students are required to submit a dissertation proposal which will in part inform the allocation of an appropriate supervisor. The proposal will be assessed and is worth 15% of the 60 credit point dissertation module (the remaining 85% for the completed dissertation). The dissertation proposal must be submitted as a soft copy to the Turnitin link of LD0422 under the eLP. The submission date(s) for the proposal will be announced on the eLP.

MASTERS DISSERTATION PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

This information tells you how to structure your research proposal using the sections below. The Dissertation Proposal Form (template) is available from the eLP under the Key Information section. You will also find some past example proposals with generic feedback to help you see what previous students have done. The word limit for the proposal is 3000 words. Here are the sections of the Proposal:

Section 1: Researchable Topic Area (Approx. 300 words)

You should include background and issue(s) underlying your research topic area.

Section 2: Objectives for the Research (Approx. 150 words)

You should state 3-4 maximum research objectives, relating to academic theories, your proposed investigations, your analysis and your conclusions.

Section 3: Literature Review (Approx. 1050 words)

You should identify and discuss the academic theories and some current research relevant to your researchable topic area.

Section 4: Details of your research (Approx. 1050 words)

You should identify who or what you will use to obtain your data or information; explain how you will collect this data / information and how you will get access; identify how you are going to analyse your data and information.

Section 5: Research Ethics (Approx. 150 words)

If your study involves people, briefly describe what you will consider in order to ensure that your research follows the University’s Ethical Policies and Procedures.

If your study involves secondary data only, you should advise us of any ethical issues or the absence of any ethical issues.

Section 6: Conclusions (Approx. 300 words)

You should describe what your research will achieve by referring back to your objectives.

Section 7: Timetable for your research

Give a month by month indication of when you are going to work on various parts of your dissertation (e.g. your literature review; your collection of data / information; your analysis of data / information etc)

Section 8: References

List in sources you have used in the production of your proposal. This must be in the correct format (APA style).

Once the proposal is completed it must be submitted to the Turnitin Link under the Blackboard site for LD0422 by the deadline posted on the LD0422 eLP site. You must also submit a completed ‘Dissertation Proposal Registration Form’ – available from the eLP.

ASSESSMENT COMPONENT 2: MASTERS DISSERATION ( 15000 WORDS, WEIGHTAGE 85%)

(Some basic instruction if required here)

COMPONENTS OF THE MASTERS DISSERTATION

The arrangement of the completed dissertation is in three stages, preliminaries, the body of work, and end material.

Preliminaries (to be arranged in the following order)

Covers

Front sheet/Title Page Declarations

Abstract- In no less than 200 and no more than 300 words

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

Glossary

The Body of Work

The End Material

References

Bibliography

Appendices

Back cover sheet

Further details of the format of the preliminaries and end material are provided later in this document.

Main sections of the dissertation

Title – The title should be succinct yet clearly specify the content of the report. This should be descriptive and explicit rather than poetic or implicit. It should be agreed and finalised as part of the final draft. It may be different from the original proposed title.

Abstract – The purpose of the abstract is to summarise the entire dissertation, including a description of the problem, the student’s contributions, and conclusions. Four keywords are required.

Acknowledgements – The student may wish to thank those people who have been particularly helpful in the preparation of the dissertation. Consideration of persons external to the Newcastle Business School is particularly appropriate. Facetious acknowledgements are not acceptable.

Declarations and Word Count – a declaration page signed by the student MUST be included. See the eLP for the Declaration template. Please do not forget to sign the Declaration.

Introduction – The purpose of this section is to contextualise the study. This means that the significance or importance of the subject is set out. If there is no apparent importance to the study to any external reader, the topic may not be appropriate. Personal interest may inspire selection of the dissertation topic, but ultimately, its importance to others should be specified. This can often be done by positioning the dissertation in relation to other work that has been published either as an advancement, continuation, compilation or verification. This section should also tell the reader how the topic will be unfolded and the order of forthcoming material.

Body of Work – The sections of each dissertation will differ, but in any case should progress logically, starting with a critical review of existing knowledge (the literature review), presentation of a summary or synthesis, introduction of research methodology and findings, if applicable, or introduction of case material.

The Literature Review – This will include the following qualities:

The topic of the dissertation will derive from a systematic body of knowledge;

The review of this knowledge is made as current as possible;

The knowledge is organised into a comprehensible and explicit structure;

All major points are included, and extraneous information omitted;

Critical theoretical analysis/evaluation informs the choice of research approaches/methods;

A summary is produced outlining the current state of the knowledge.

It is further implied that the result of the literature review will be used either in 1) a situation for which the student has collected primary data OR 2) to critically examine and assess the operation of this knowledge in an existing case study OR 3) to re-evaluate existing published data or knowledge to derive new knowledge or meaning. The main points of the body of knowledge being synthesised are to be I) critically selected and analysed and ii) the strengths and weaknesses of the synthesis itself are to be discussed and appropriate conclusions drawn.

Research methodology and methods – A degree of proficiency in the understanding, selection and execution of research methodologies and methods must be evident. It is expected that these procedures will provide:

a defensible verification of the ideas put forward in the dissertation,

development and exploration of the ideas in applied conditions. If an existing case is presented, sufficient secondary research must be attempted to produce a coherent and informed critical evaluation of that case.

It is also possible that the application of knowledge can be made under some other circumstances not directly indicated here, so long as the use of the knowledge is appropriate and illustrative.

The connection between the knowledge and the original case or primary data for the dissertation must be explicitly articulated and the case or data be presented as a valid and reliable means of verification of this knowledge. If the goal of the dissertation is not data based but conceptual in nature, then the validity and verifiability of the concepts must be established.

Whenever data is being collected or used, students must adhere to the University Regulations relating to Ethics and Data Protection. Details of the Ethics procedure are available ethics and governance Northumbria https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/research/ethics-and-governance/

Conclusion – This section explains the relations between the body of knowledge and the case or new finding. It should present the case for the dissertation’s success in meeting its goals, as well as any shortcomings and limitations that apply. It may suggest further work or study needed on the topic, as well as ways the new work can be used or applied in other cases. It is not meant to be a summary or restatement of the entire dissertation, which belongs in the abstract. If the student has developed any strong personal opinions about the subject this is the place where such content is appropriate.

Appendices – Often the concepts of the study can be clarified in graphic form, or data presented in tabular form. Normally, this material should be entered into the text at or near the place it is referred to in the text. Where such material would be inconvenient to include in the text itself, it can be included in an appendix. As a general rule, if figures, tables, charts or quotes are less than a full page and can be conveniently included in the text, you will want to do so, since reference to appendices is awkward for the reader. All such material, in the text or at the end, should be titled and sequentially numbered. Tabular material presented in landscape format, should be bound with the top of the table to the spine.

Appendices are designed for the optional inclusion of charts, graphs, additional data, photographs, maps, sample questionnaires/interview schedules etc. These must scan copies and clear to read. It is not appropriate to include photocopies of journal articles or similar material.

The Reflective statement to be included in this section – see the eLP for further information.

You must submit:

A soft copy to Turnitin and must remember to include the following 6-documents in the appendices of your dissertation:

Supervision Meeting Log-sheets – 6-8 meetings

Ethical approval form signed by a member of the academic team and yourself.

Any other approval/permission taken.

Questionnaire/interview schedule with the front consent letter.

A brief reflection on the dissertation and your research.

LD475 coursework (See As brief under LD0475) – Pass or fail module.

Appendices are labelled alphabetically, although if there is little such material and it is all of a similar nature, it may all be included in one Appendix.

PAGE LAYOUT

Pages should be numbered in sequence at the top right hand corner, starting with and including the title page.

Margins and headings: the specifications are 38mm (11/2”) left margin, 31 mm (11/4”) on the other three sides. The page number should be above the top margin line. The right margin should be unjustified (left ragged), since the spacing between words used to make the right margin even inhibits readability greatly, while adding little aesthetically. Headers and footers are to be used with discretion. Please do NOT include your name in any header or footer.

Tables and charts should be numbered in sequence by chapter, e.g. Table 3.1 is the first table in Chapter 3. Each figure should be properly referenced and accompanied by a descriptive title that completely explains the contents of the figure.

DISSERTATION LENGTH

Masters Dissertation word limit

Word Count

The word count is to be declared on the front page of your dissertation. The word count does not include:

Title page

Reference list

Appendices (including reflective learning statement)

Appropriate tables, figures and illustrations

Contents page

Bibliography

Glossary

Quotes from interviews and focus groups

Declarations page

Acknowledgements

Abstract

End material

Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.

If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARNA page 30 Section 3.4 this will be regarded as academic misconduct.

You are required to integrate ideas in a succinct way (i.e. without unnecessary description and context). This is a necessary skill.

Penalties

The acceptable length of this dissertation is between 13,500 and 16,500 words.

If your work is above this, the following penalty will apply: The final mark is reduced by 10% if the word length is exceeded by more than 10% over 15,000 (i.e. 16,501). For example a mark of 70% would be reduced to 63%.

Dissertations shorter than 13,500 words will not attract a specific penalty as it is anticipated their short nature will affect the overall quality anyway.

FORMAT OF REFERENCES

You must use the correct referencing system and that is the APA system. The APA method of referencing uses the author’s name and the date of the publication. In-text citations give brief details of the work you are referring to in your text. References are listed at the end of the text in alphabetical order by the author’s name. The general format of an electronic journal reference in the APA style is shown below:

Coutu, D. (2009). Why Teams Don’t Work. Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 98-105. Retrieved 29th April 2012 from EBSCO http://searchebscohost.com

Plagiarism

The intellectual work of others that is being summarised in the dissertation must be attributed to its source. It is assumed that all ideas, opinions, conclusions, specific wordings, quotations, conceptual structures and data, whether reproduced exactly or in paraphrase, which are not referenced to another source are the work of the student. If this is not the case, an act of plagiarism may have occurred, which is cause for disciplinary action under the ‘Academic Misconduct’ process. For details please read university’s plagiarism policy.

RESEARCH ETHICS

ALL students must obtain ethical clearance for their dissertation research BEFORE starting to work with any data. This applies to students using either primary or secondary data for their dissertation; therefore it applies to ALL dissertation students. Students must have confirmation that their research has been approved in order to start their data collection. Students who enrolled on their Masters programme in or after Jan 2019 must use the Northumbria online ethics approval process.

Here is an outline of the process that must be followed:

Once you have decided your research strategy (and after consulting with your supervisor) then you should access Ethics Online by visiting the Northumbria Ethics and Governance webpage or the Student portal. Students should complete their online ethics application by following the instructions provided on the website. Your supervisor will be able to provide guidance should you need this.

Please be advised that before commencing any research you must get your ethical form approved.ONLINE Ethical approval must be obtained for all MSc business with dissertations prior to the commencement of your dissertation research. Online Research Ethics form can be found on the “ethics and governance Northumbria” website or just simply follow the steps below:

 

Access the system at https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/research/ethics-and-governance/

Then go to the Ethics Online – research ethics approval system

Then go to the Online Research Ethics and Governance Approval: Access the system at Ethics Online, where this link will take you to the page to sign in with your Northumbria University username and password.

At the welcome page, please start with Create a New Submission”
On the submission page, please complete all sections, for note,
 

Faculty: Business and Law

Department: Choose depending upon your pathways.

Submitting: PGT Post Graduate Taught

Module code: LD0480

Module Tutor: Sumesh Dadwal (Find and Click yes)

Research Supervisor: Name of your Supervisor  (Find and Click yes)

Named co-ordinator: Sumesh Dadwal (Find and Click yes)

Note: In case  if Sumesh Dadwal is your supervisor then input (Imad Yasir Nawaz  as named co-ordinator).

You need to consult your tutor and potential supervisor for advice before submitting an ethics approval form. If your ethical risk is High/Red, it will not be approved straight-away ( it goes to Ethical committee) and as a result, you will not be allowed to carry on your dissertation until the ethical form is approved. It is advisable that you try that your research methodology and data collection is within low or medium  risk level.

Then Create and Save to move to the next page where you input all the required necessary details. 

It is advisable to Save a Pdf file and show the same to your supervisor. Once the supervisor gives okay to this. you can click submit button.

Once complete please submit. 

Once the application has been submitted then it will be passed to a reviewer for them to assess. If the reviewer requests changes to your plans then you will receive a message from the system regarding this. Once your reviewer is satisfied with your ethics application then they will approve it on the online system. You will then get an email notifying you that your application has been approved. You must keep this email as evidence that your research has been approved. You are now free to begin to collect and work with data for your dissertation.

Please note that students who do not follow the correct ethical procedures for their research will be penalised accordingly and this will result in a reduction of marks.

SUPERVISION

Each student will be allocated a supervisor to supervise the students’ work. Each student is expected to attend 6-8 supervision meetings. All students will have a Logbook that is used to keep records of interaction with their supervisor. The total number of hours allocated for face-to-face supervision is four hours and supervision are nominally six 40 minute meetings but can be arranged differently, for shorter or longer periods, at the request of the student and agreed through negotiation between student and supervisor. It is strongly recommended that students try to spread out their meetings regularly. Staff cannot and will not compensate for failure of the student to use meetings early in the dissertation period by providing meetings compressed into the final stages of the dissertation period. For more details read dissertation handbook.

SUBMISSION OF DISSERTATION

Dissertations must be submitted by the dates posted on the eLP.

Students are strongly recommended to keep a copy as a personal reference copy for security.

Students are required to submit one electronic copy as a ‘Word’ file to the Turnitin Link under LD0480 of eLP.

A student must submit a soft copy of your dissertation to Turnitin under LD0480 eLP by the target date Student must remember to include the following 6-documents in the appendices of your soft copy of the dissertation:

Supervision Meeting Log-sheets – 6-8 meetings

Ethical approval form – Online signed

Any other approval/permission taken.

Questionnaire/interview schedule with the front consent letter.

A brief reflection on the dissertation and your research.

LD475 coursework (See As brief under LD0475) – a pass or fail module.

 

 No printed copies are required to be submitted.

ASSESSMENT AND MARKING

A standard marking form will be used that assesses the work against the Newcastle Business School Cross Comparative Benchmarks for Undergraduate and Masters Dissertations (Appendix A). The marking form used for the Masters dissertation is available from the eLP so that students can see the criteria against which their work will be judged. The marks available for the different sections of the dissertation are shown on the marking sheet.

The Masters Dissertation mark will equal 85% of the module assessment, and the remaining 15% is for the Dissertation proposal. Students should note that a pass mark for the dissertation can be used to compensate a fail mark for the proposal. Provided the dissertation is passed with a mark of 50% or more, when the combined mark for the proposal and final dissertation results in an overall mark of less than 50%, a mark of 50% will be awarded for the module.

The dissertation will be assessed independently by two academic members of staff; normally the supervisor and a second marker. A final mark is then agreed between the two markers. Occasionally, a dissertation may be assessed by a third marker. Additionally, a sample of dissertations is assessed by relevant external examiners.

Please remember that Supervisors will not disclose potential marks to students at any stage whilst the work is underway or being formally assessed (as stated in the ‘Expectations’ section of these guidelines). Students will receive their mark and a copy of the completed assessment sheet following the conclusion of the examination boards.

MODULE SPECIFIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

ASSESSMENT COMPONENT 1: DISSERTATION PROPOSAL REPORT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

The NBS Dissertation Proposal Feedback Sheet

Student Name:

Student ID:

Programme:

MSc Business With

Supervisor/first marker

Please print name

Signed

Areas

Please tick as appropriate

Marks

Met

Partly Met

Not Met

Comments

Researchable Topic Area

Introduction and Objectives for the Research [15%]

Literature Review [35%]

Details of your Research Methodology [30%]

Research Ethics [5%]

. Conclusions [5%]

Timetable for your Research[5%]

Structure , formatting, coherence and Reference List [5%]

Total [100%]

ASSESSMENT COMPONENT 2: MASTERS DISSERTAION ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

FORM1 : NBS EMA RUBRIC TEMPLATE – MASTERS DISSERTATION

The NBS Masters Dissertation

Section

Mark

Max

Student Name:

Student ID:

Presentation

10

Introduction

10

Programme:

Agreed Mark:

Literature review

20

Methodology/Methods/Ethics

15

Supervisor/first marker

Please print name

Signed

Findings/Analysis

20

Synthesis/Conclusions

25

2nd marker

Please print name

Signed

Total

100

Turnitin Similarity Percentage =

Marks by first, second marker and agreed Marks

First Marks

Second marks

Agreed Marks

Rationale for agreeing marks :

Assurance of Learning

Please tick box (Exceeded/Met/Not Met) to match with grading on the additional sheets

Not Met

Met

Exceeded

Goal 2 Objective 2

Reflect on their own ethical values

Goal 4 Objective 2

Demonstrate an understanding of the impact of innovative and contemporary research on the business and management community

Goal 4 Objective 3

Acquire, interpret and apply specialist functional knowledge in relation to their programme of study (specialist programmes only)

Goal 5 Objective 1

Plan and complete a major piece of research or project on a contemporary business, financial, management or leadership topic

Goal 5 Objective 2

Demonstrate skills of analysis and synthesis in the application of research methods to the exploration of contemporary business and management issues

Criteria

Scales

0-39%

Standard Not Met 1

40-49%

Standard Not Met 2

50-59%

Meets Standard 1

60-69%

Meets Standard 2

70-79% Exceeds Standard 1

80-89% Exceeds Standard 2

90-100%

Exceeds Standard 3

Presentation

Significant lack of compliance with the NBS Guidelines.
Very badly written. Difficult to follow with many errors in presentation. The formatting of the referencing is completely insufficient.

Indicative mark:

[0 – 4]

Below the standard we would expect of a Masters student. Several significant
defects. Significant errors in the formatting of referencing. NBS Guidelines not followed. Insufficient presentation of material and there are significant weaknesses.

[ 4 – 5 ]

Adequate, in terms of compliance with
the NBS Masters Guidelines. Parts are difficult to follow and there may be other weaknesses. Referencing generally adequate, but with a number of
errors. Some grammatical and spelling errors present.

[ 5 – 6]

Quite readable but one or two of the key areas have deficiencies. Referencing generally good and in the correct format, but with
a few minor errors. The NBS Masters Guidelines largely complied with.
Lack of integration.

[ 6 – 7 ]

Conforms to NBS Masters Guidelines.
Easy to read; but use of English could be further improved. Very good presentation. Referencing in the correct format. Strong linkages through chapters.

[ 7 – 8 ]

In accordance with NBS Masters
Guidelines; clear easy to follow format; writing style very clear; correct spelling, grammar and punctuation; references; title and declarations all correct. Excellent linkages between chapters.


[ 8 – 9 ]

In accordance with NBS Masters Guidelines for all aspects.
Outstanding in all areas, including linkages between chapters.

[ 9– 10]

Actual marks in Presentation

Introduction

Completely insufficient in terms of research topic area and objectives need to be revised / changed. A number of elements are missing. Very little understanding shown.

Title , Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) missing/incorrect and Declarations all correct.
Reflective learning statement may be missing from the appendices.

[0 – 4]

Research topic area is identified but there is insufficient understanding of the area/topic. Academic objectives are not appropriate and needs refining. Not all areas are covered.
Title , Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) needs significant improvement and Declarations all correct.
Reflective learning statement may be missing from the appendices.

[4 – 5]

Adequate explanation of research topic
area; objectives stated – but may need further explanation / refining; shows adequate understanding of the topic area. Dissertation content is outlined.
Title , Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) needs improvement and Declarations all correct.
Inclusion of reflective learning statement in an appendix.

[5 – 6]

Good explanation of research topic area. Academic objectives and boundaries stated. Outline of dissertation structure is detailed. Student understands what their research is about, but the objectives may need further refining. Lacks depth.
Title , Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) is good but perhaps missing minor details and Declarations all correct.
Inclusion of reflective learning statement in an appendix.

[6 – 7]

Very good discussion of researchable topic. Academic objectives and boundaries clearly stated.
Outline structure of dissertation provided.
All main areas included but could be improved.

Title’ Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) has very few errors and Declarations all correct.
Inclusion of reflective learning statement in an appendix.

[7 – 8]

Excellent discussion of researchable question or topic which is clearly indicated by the title.
Very clear research question and objectives.
Very good explanation of the nature of the problem or issue.

Title, Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) and Declarations all correct.
Inclusion of reflective learning statement in an appendix.

[8 – 9]

Outstanding discussion of researchable question put into context by a consideration of existing literature. Extremely clear research question and objectives and very good explanation of the nature of the problem or issue.

Title, Abstract (For CIPD requirements this is to be replaced by an Executive Summary) and Declarations all correct.
Inclusion of reflective learning statement in an appendix.

[9-10]

Actual marks in Introduction

0-39%

Standard Not Met 1

40-49%

Standard Not Met 2

50-59%

Meets Standard 1

60-69%

Meets Standard 2

70-79% Exceeds Standard 1

80-89% Exceeds Standard 2

90-100%

Exceeds Standard 3

Literature Review

Goal 4 Objective 3

Lacks understanding of what is required. The use of quotations and citations is not effective. Review does not relate to academic objectives. Theory has very few cited sources which largely standard text books are

[0 – 8]

Lacks an adequate review of existing literature. The use of quotations and citations is weak or inappropriate and therefore does not support the literature review effectively.
Theory is descriptive in character with few cited sources.

[8 – 10]

Some discussion of existing literature. The use of quotations and citations is adequate but shows room for improvement. Limited number of sources used; mainly text books, few academic journal articles.
Critical evaluation is weak.

[10 – 12]

Good discussion of existing literature. Citations and quotations are used to good effect. Review includes a number of academic journal articles. Some good
critical evaluation of the existing literature.

[12 – 14]

Very good discussion of existing
literature supported by appropriate citations and quotations. Review includes many academic journal articles, but not extensive. Some critical evaluation of literature but could be developed further. Summary of main points included.

[14 – 16]

Excellent in depth review of relevant, up-to-date literature with extensive use of academic journal articles supported by extensive citations and appropriate use of quotations.
Excellent identification of relevant theoretical base. Critical evaluation of major theoretical contributions.
Summary links well with the following chapter.
[16 – 18]

An outstanding literature review, excellent in every respect. Review is current, highly critical and shows real insight and mastery of the topic area. Referencing is almost faultless. Extremely clear summary of the main themes/issues thus providing strong links to the following chapter.

[18-20]

Actual marks in Literature Review

Methodology, Methods and Ethics

Goal 2 Objective 2

Major errors or omissions are present. The explanation provided of methodology and research methods, data collection and analysis are completely insufficient: all extremely unclear or missing. Sampling is completely insufficient (either very small or inappropriate sample). There are very serious limitations with the research and ethical issues and perhaps serious breaches of the University and NBS Ethical Guidelines.

[0 – 6]

The explanation provided of methodology, research methods and data collection and analysis are insufficient. Limitations of research have not been adequately addressed. Discussion of the sampling method is insufficient. There may be serious issues regarding the Ethics procedures – breaches of the University and NBS Ethical Guidelines.

[6 – 7]

The explanation provided of methodology, research methods and data collection and analysis are adequate but brief and lacks depth. Limitations of research may have been mentioned but not in sufficient detail. Discussion of the sampling method is adequate.
Ethical issues are addressed appropriately according to the guidelines provided. Informed consent and organisational consent have been granted (where appropriate).

[7 – 8]

Good explanation (but lacking in full justification) of methodology, research methods and data collection and analysis. Limitations of research may have been acknowledged but not fully considered. Discussion of the sampling method is good, with a sensible method & well justified.
Ethical issues are addressed appropriately according to the guidelines provided. Informed consent and organisational consent have been granted (where appropriate).

[9 – 10]

Very good explanation of methodologies with a clear justification of selected research methods. Data collection and analysis is clear and well executed. There is an explanation of practical details of how the research was undertaken with limitations noted. Discussion of the sampling method is very good, with a suitable method & well justified.
Ethical issues are addressed appropriately according to the guidelines provided. Informed consent and organisational consent have been granted (where appropriate).
[10 – 12]

Excellent explanation of methodologies with a clear justification of selected research methods. Data collection and analysis is very clear and very well executed. Limitations are discussed (for example a discussion of any potential bias). Selection & discussion of the sampling method is excellent.
Ethical issues are handled excellently.

[12 – 13]

Outstandingly clear explanation of methodologies with a clear justification of selected research methods. Data collection and analysis is extremely well executed. There are clear details of the practicalities of the research. Selection & discussion of the sampling method is outstanding.
Ethical issues are addressed appropriately according to the guidelines provided. Informed consent and organisational consent have been granted (where appropriate).

[13 – 15]

Actual in RM

0-39%

Standard Not Met 1

40-49%

Standard Not Met 2

50-59%

Meets Standard 1

60-69%

Meets Standard 2

70-79% Exceeds Standard 1

80-89% Exceeds Standard 2

90-100%

Exceeds Standard 3

Findings, Analysis and Discussion

Goal 5 Objective 2

Major errors or omissions are present regarding the application of relevant research techniques. Completely insufficient data analysis with little evidence of a clear method. No critical analysis of findings against relevant theory identified in the literature review. Discussion and evaluation of findings are completely insufficient.

[0 – 8]

Lacks application of relevant research techniques. Insufficiently rigorous data analysis. No critical analysis of findings against relevant theory identified in the literature review. Insufficient discussion and no evaluation of findings.

[8 – 10]

Some application of research techniques adopted. Data analysis is adequate and uses an appropriate method. Some analysis of findings against theory identified in the literature review. Adequate discussion and evaluation of findings.

[10 – 12]

Good application of relevant research techniques adopted. The data analysis is comprehensive and follows a clear analysis method. Some good critical analysis of findings against relevant theory identified in the literature review. Good discussion and evaluation of findings.

[12 – 14]

Very good application of relevant research techniques. The data analysis is comprehensive, well presented and follows a very clear analysis method, but could perhaps have more depth in places. Very good critical analysis of findings against relevant theory identified in the literature review. Very good discussion and evaluation of findings.

[14 – 16]

Excellent application of relevant research techniques. The data analysis is comprehensive, very well presented and follows a very clear analysis method. The analysis has depth (for example investigation of inter-variable links for a quantitative study). Excellent critical analysis, discussion and evaluation of findings.

[16 – 18]

Outstanding application of relevant research techniques. The data analysis is comprehensive, very well presented and follows a very clear analysis method. The analysis has depth (for example comprehensive investigation of inter-variable links for a quantitative study). Outstanding critical analysis of findings against relevant theory identified in the literature review. Outstanding discussion and evaluation of findings.

[18 – 20]

Actual marks in Findings, Analysis and Discussion

Synthesis, Conclusions, Recommendations and Implications

Goal 4 Objective 2

Completely insufficient (very weak) synthesis of the literature and the research findings. There are major errors or omissions in sections such as conclusions, recommendations,
issues of bias / limitations or future research.

[0 – 9]

Findings are insufficiently related to the body of knowledge presented in the literature review. Conclusions are only partly drawn and are not supported by findings.
Conclusions do not relate back to the stated research questions. Issues of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation have not been adequately identified.
Recommendations may not be included.
Implications for future research will not have been adequately identified

[10 – 12]

The synthesis is adequate, with the findings related to the body of knowledge presented in the literature review. Conclusions are only partly drawn and are not fully supported by findings.
Conclusions relate back to the stated research question/objectives but there could be weaknesses here. Issues of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation have been adequately identified.
Recommendations are included (where appropriate).
Future research has been addressed.

[13 – 14]

The synthesis is good, with the findings related to the literature. Conclusions are well presented and are supported by the findings.
Conclusions relate back to the stated research question/objectives quite strongly. Issues of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation have been well explained.
Recommendations are included (where appropriate).
Future research has been addressed.


[15 – 17]

The synthesis is very good, with many of the findings related to the literature. Conclusions are very well presented and are supported by the findings.
Conclusions relate back to the stated research question/objectives in a very clear manner. Issues of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation have been very well explained.
Recommendations are included (where appropriate).
Future research has been addressed.


[18 – 19]

Excellent and thorough synthesis of the findings and literature. Conclusions are very well presented and are supported by the findings.
Conclusions relate back to the stated research question/objectives in an extremely clear manner. Detailed discussion of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation.
Recommendations are included (where appropriate).
Future research has been addressed.


[20 -22]

Outstanding synthesis of the findings and literature. Conclusions are outstanding and relate directly to the research question/objectives. Detailed discussion of bias/limitations of the whole Dissertation.
Recommendations are included (where appropriate).
The ideas for possible future research demonstrate careful consideration.

[23 – 25]

Conclusions, Recommendations and Implications

0-39%

Standard Not Met 1

40-49%

Standard Not Met 2

50-59%

Meets Standard 1

60-69%

Meets Standard 2

70-79% Exceeds Standard 1

80-89% Exceeds Standard 2

90-100%

Exceeds Standard 3

Overall

Goal 5 Objective 1

The dissertation is completely insufficient and has very serious weaknesses. The student has failed to demonstrate an understanding of what is required for master’s research.
To reach a pass standard when resubmitting this will require the student to undertake a significant amount of new work – not just minor improvements.
The student will need to adequately address all the issues identified in the feedback they have been provided with.

[0 – 39]

Some understanding is shown of what is required for master’s research for some sections and/or chapters but overall the work is insufficient. The dissertation fails to reach a sufficient level either in an important area or is generally weak and lacks depth and rigor in a number of areas.
The standard of presentation and writing is insufficient.
To reach a pass standard when resubmitting the student will need to adequately address all the issues identified in the feedback they have been provided with.


[40 – 49]

The dissertation is adequate, but there are likely to be weaknesses in presentation, writing, critical evaluation and analysis. A basic understanding of what is required for master’s research is evident.

[50 – 59]

The quality of presentation is good, and it is easy to follow. The student shows good understanding of the master’s research approach in all areas.

[60 – 69]

The dissertation is very good and easy to read. All the key sections and elements are present and have a very good level of discussion. There is clear critical analysis and evaluation of the theory and findings and these are brought together in the synthesis and conclusions.

[70 – 79]

An excellent dissertation which is easy to read and well-laid out. The student has demonstrated a thorough understanding of their study. The theoretical base and the conclusions from the findings are linked strongly through the synthesis.
The level of critical thinking is excellent, and the student has shown a mastery of concepts and research techniques.


[80 – 89]

The Dissertation is outstanding in all areas.

[90-100]

Overall Marks

FORM 2 : The NBS Masters Dissertation Feedback Sheet

FORM 2 : The NBS Masters Dissertation Feedback Sheet

Student Name:

Student ID:

Programme:

MSc Business With

Supervisor/first marker

Please print name

Signed

2nd marker

Please print name

Signed

First Marks

Second marks

Agreed Marks

The rationale for Agreed Marks

Comments

LD0480- Feedback from Marker : First / Second (delete the one not applicable)

Marks

Presentation and coherences [10]

Introduction [10]

Literature [20]

Methodology [15]

Findings& discussion [20]

Synthesis, Conclusions, Recommendations & Implications [25]

Total [100]

THE NEWCASTLE BUSINESS SCHOOL MASTERS DISSERTATION PROPOSAL TEMPLATE

Name _____________________________Programme _________________

(SURNAME) (FORENAMES)

This form MUST be accompanied by the NBS PG Dissertation Registration Form (available from the Postgraduate Office)

The number of words for each section are for GUIDANCE ONLY.

1 Researchable Topic Area: you should include background and issue(s) underlying the research (approximately 300words):

Objectives for the Research: you should state 3-4 maximum research objectives, relating to academic theories, your proposed investigation, your analysis and your conclusions (approximately 150 words):

3 Literature Review: you should identify and discuss the academic theories and some current research relevant to your researchable topic area You should use in text citations, APA reference style and add a full reference list in Section 8 (approximately 1050 words).

4 Details of your research: (a) Identify who or what you will use to obtain data or information (b) Explain how you will collect this data / information and how you will get access (c) Identify how you are going to analyse your data / information (approximately 1050 words).

5 Research ethics: – if your study involves people, briefly describe what you will consider in order to ensure that your research follows the University’s Ethical Policies and Procedures, for example, individual consent and / or organisational consent. If your study involves secondary data only, you should advise us of any ethical issues or the absence of any ethical issues (approximately 150 words).

6 Conclusions: you should describe what your research will achieve by referring back to your objectives in Section 2 (approximately 300 words):

7 Timetable for your research: you should cover the whole period of time available (by month). You should indicate below when you are going to work on various parts of your dissertation, for example, your literature review, your collection of data / information, your analysis of the data / information, your conclusions and final revisions of your dissertation. Set this out in a table as follows

Month

Dissertation Activity (parts)

Month here

Description of work to be undertaken here

Month 2

Etc…

Month 3

Etc…

8 Reference List – in APA style.

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY STATEMENT: You must adhere to the university regulations on academic conduct. Formal inquiry proceedings will be instigated if there is any suspicion of plagiarism or any other form of misconduct in your work. Refer to the University’s Assessment Regulations for Northumbria Awards if you are unclear as to the meaning of these terms. The latest copy is available on the University website. https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/pl,-d-,005-v003-academic-misconduct-policy.pdf?modified=20190605171211&la=en&hash=A55A56D5BAD5746FC530D31C6291B10F861275CE

(last accessed on 13th August 2019)

FORMATIVE FEEDBACK

There will be an opportunity for formative feedback during the semester. You are advised to start working on this assignment as early as possible so that you can seek clarification from the module tutor regarding any questions you might have during the semester. Note that tutors will not predict your grade, and you should not take the lack of comment on any aspect of your work as indicating that it is correct. You should make every effort to take advantage of formative feedback as tutors will not comment on draft work at other times. Remember that you will get more useful feedback from us by asking specific questions than just presenting us with your documentation and asking, ‘Is this right?’

PENALTIES FOR EXCEEDING WORD LIMITS:


The following penalties will be applied after any reductions in mark due to late submission have been made, Penalties will be applied as defined in the University Policy on Word Limits Policy.
https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/word-limits-policy.pdf?la=en&hash=D06E866BA9C788D7B1FD8EE3E7E3F34026CE9673.

(last accessed on 13th August 2019)

The actual word count is to be declared on the front of the assessment submission.

LATE SUBMISSION POLICY:

For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment (i.e.100%) shall be deducted from the assessment mark. Penalties will be applied as defined in the University Policy on the Late submission work.

https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/late-submission-of-work-and-extension-requests-policy_v2.pdf?modified=20190619071234&la=en&hash=C112B22E14B9075D4E92C6A5842088F7921BAAA4

(Last accessed on 13th August 2019)

For clarity: a late piece of work that would have scored 65%, 55% or 45% had it been handed in on time will be awarded 55%, 45% or 35% respectively as 10% of the total available marks will have been deducted.

FAILURE TO SUBMIT: The University requires all students to submit assessed coursework by the deadline stated in the assessment brief. Where coursework is submitted without approval after the published hand-in deadline, penalties will be applied as defined in the University Policy on the Late Submission of Work.

https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/late-submission-of-work-and-extension-requests-policy_v2.pdf?modified=20190619071234&la=en&hash=C112B22E14B9075D4E92C6A5842088F7921BAAA4

(Last accessed on 13th August 2019)