ASSESSMENT: Individual Coursework
Module Code:
BMO0273
Module Title:
Assessment Type
(Initial)
Academic Year
Fundamentals of Leadership
Individual coursework
2021/22 Block 5 & 6
Assessment Task
Individual essay
No organisation can be successful without effective leadership. Effective leaders
understand the relationship between themselves, their followers and the situation or
context in which they are leading.
Drawing on published academic theory and research, critically evaluate what
distinguishes a leader from an effective leader.
Your essay must include discussion of:
– Approaches to leadership
– Communication and leading a virtual team
– Motivating followers and managing diversity
– Leaders’ emotional intelligence and reflection
Duration: N/A
Word Count: 2500 words
Task specific guidance:
•
This assessment is 70% of your grade for this module.
• Your answer should include all of the required four areas of discussion, plus a
•
•
•
•
conclusion to draw your essay together.
Your essay should draw on material from across the module to demonstrate your
knowledge and understanding of Fundamentals of Leadership.
Your answer should be supported by academic theory and research, and
evidence of wider reading that demonstrates your understanding and use of
published academic research.
This is an academic essay and therefore you should not select a particular leader
or organisation on which to base your essay. You may wish to provide examples
to support your arguments.
You should demonstrate your ability to critically evaluate.
PG Assessment Brief and Assessment Criteria 21-22
Word count:
Guidance on the use of word count:
– Introduction (approx. 150 words)
– Approaches to leadership (approx. 650 words)
– Communication and leading a virtual team (approx. 500 words)
– Motivating followers and managing diversity (approx. 500 words)
– Emotional intelligence and reflection (approx. 500 words)
– Conclusion (approx. 200 words)
The assessment task provides approximate word count per section. As this is an
essay you should not include a contents page or any figures or tables. The word
count includes everything from the first word of the introduction to the final word of
your conclusion. The reference list is not included in the word count. There should
be no appendices.
General study guidance:
•
Cite all information used in your work which is clearly from a source. Try to
ensure that all sources in your reference list are seen as citations in your
work, and all names cited in the work appear in your reference list.
•
Reference and cite your work in accordance with the APA 7th system – the
University’s chosen referencing style. For specific advice, you can talk
to your Business librarians or go to the library help desk, or you can
access library guidance via the following link:
o APA 7th referencing: https://library.hud.ac.uk/pages/apareferencing/
•
The University has regulations relating to academic misconduct, including
plagiarism. The Learning Innovation and Development Centre can advise
and help you with how to avoid ‘poor scholarship’ and potential academic
misconduct. You can contact them at busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk.
•
If you have any concerns about your writing, referencing, research or
presentation skills, you are welcome to consult the Learning Innovation
Development Centre team busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk. It is possible to
arrange 1:1 consultation with a LIDC tutor once you have planned or written
a section of your work, so that they can advise you on areas to develop.
•
Do not exceed the word limit.
Assessment criteria
•
The Assessment Criteria are shown the end of this document. Your tutor
will discuss how your work will be assessed/marked and will explain how
the assessment criteria apply to this piece of work. These criteria have
been designed for your level of study.
2
•
These criteria will be used to mark your work and will be used to support the
electronic feedback you receive on your marked assignment. Before
submission, check that you have tried to meet the requirements of
the higher-grade bands to the best of your ability. Please note that the
marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the
marking criteria.
•
The Learning Innovation Development Centre can help you to understand
and use the assessment criteria. To book an appointment, either visit them
on The Street in the Charles Sikes Building or email them on
busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk
Learning Outcomes
This section is for information only.
The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific
validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these
are the things you need to show in this piece of work.
On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate:
1.
2.
4.
5.
Demonstrate a critical understanding of leadership style, skills, leading people and
leading in a diverse context
Demonstrate a critical awareness of the application of leadership theory to
different organisational contexts
Express and justify an individual perspective on leadership approaches in business
organisations
Communicate complex information appropriately in writing using academic
conventions.
Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions.
Submission information
Word Limit:
2,500
Submission Date:
08/04/2022
Feedback Date:
06/05/2022
Submission Time:
15.00
3
Submission Method:
Electronically via module site in Brightspace. Paper/hard
copy submissions are not required. For technical support,
please contact: busvle@hud.ac.uk
4
Appendix 1 PGT Assessment Criteria
These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed. They describe different levels of performance
of a given criteria.
Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking
criteria.
The grades between Pass and Merit should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module.
The higher-level categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the basic requirement, perform at a superior level beyond
the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
Fulfilment of
relevant learning
outcomes
Response to the
question /task
0–9
Not met or
minimal
Unacceptable
10-19
20-34
Not met or
Not met or
minimal
partially met
Unsatisfactory
35-49
Not met or
partially met
Pass
50-59
Pass
Merit
60-69
Pass
No
response
Little
response
Adequate
response, but
with limitations
Adequate
response
Secure
response to
assessment
task
Insufficient
response
5
70-79
Pass
Very good
response to
topic;
elements of
sophistication
Distinction
80-89
90-100
Pass
Pass
Clear
command of
assessment
task;
sophisticated
approach
Full command of
assessment task;
imaginative
approach
demonstrating flair
and creativity
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
Unacceptable
A superficial answer with only peripheral
knowledge of core material and very little critical
ability
Unsatisfactory
Some
knowledge of
core material
but limited.
Pass
A coherent
and logical
answer which
shows
understanding
of the basic
principles
50-59
A systematic
understanding
of knowledge;
critical
awareness of
current
problems
and/or new
insights; can
evaluate
critically
current
research and
can evaluate
methodologies
0-9
Entirely lacking
in evidence of
knowledge and
understanding
10-19
Typically, only
able to deal
with
terminology,
basic facts
and concepts
20-34
Knowledge of
concepts falls
short of
prescribed
range
Typically only
able to deal
with
terminology,
basic facts
and concepts
35-49
Marginally
insufficient.
Adequate
knowledge of
concepts within
prescribed
range but fails
to adequately
solve problems
posed by
assessment
Presentation
Length
requirements
may not be
observed; does
not follow
academic
conventions;
language
errors impact
on intelligibility
Length
requirement
met and
academic
conventions
mostly
followed.
Possibly very
minor errors in
language
Limited insight
into the
problem or
topic
Length
requirements
may not be
observed;
does not
follow
academic
conventions;
language
errors impact
on
intelligibility
Limited
insight into
the problem
or topic
Length
requirement met
and academic
conventions
mostly followed.
Minor errors in
language
Understanding
Length
requirements
may not be
observed;
does not
follow
academic
conventions;
language
errors impact
on
intelligibility
Limited
insight into
the problem
or topic
Some insight
into the problem
or topic
Practical
understanding
of how
established
techniques of
Conceptual
and critical
understanding
of
contemporary
/ seminal
knowledge in
the subject
6
Merit
A coherent
answer that
demonstrate
s critical
evaluation
Distinction
An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding
knowledge of material and critical ability
60-69
Approachin
g excellence
in some
areas with
evidence of
the potential
to undertake
Research.
Welldeveloped
relevant
argument,
good
degree of
accuracy
and
technical
competence
Good
standard of
presentation
; length
requirement
met, and
academic
conventions
followed
70-79
Excellent.
Displays (for
example):
high levels of
accuracy;
evidence of
the potential
to undertake
research; the
ability to
analyse
primary
sources
critically.
80-89
Insightful.
Displays (for
example):
excellent
research
potential;
flexibility of
thought;
possibly of
publishable
quality.
90-100
Striking and
insightful.
Displays (for
example):
publishable
quality;
outstanding
research
potential;
originality and
independent
thought;
ability to
make
informed
judgements.
Very good
standards of
presentation
Professional
standards of
presentation
Highest
professional
standards of
presentation
Independent
, critical
evaluation
of
Authoritative,
full
understanding
of all the
issues with
Authoritative,
full
understanding
of all the
issues with
Authoritative,
full
understanding
of all the
issues with
Use of
evidence and
sources to
support task
Some
irrelevant
and/or out of
date
Sources
Some
irrelevant
and/or out of
date
Sources
Some
irrelevant
and/or out of
date
Sources
Limited sources
Development
of ideas
Argument not
developed and
may be
confused and
incoherent
Argument not
developed
and may be
confused and
incoherent
Argument not
developed
and may be
confused and
incoherent
Argument not
fully
developed and
may lack
structure
7
research and
enquiry are
used to create
and interpret
knowledge in
the discipline
Comprehensiv
e
understanding
of techniques
applicable to
own research
or advanced
scholarship
full range of
theories
with some
evidence of
originality
originality in
analysis
originality in
analysis
originality in
analysis
Complex
work and
concepts
presented,
key texts
used
effectively
Full range of
sources
used
selectively to
support
argument
Full range of
sources
used
selectively to
support
argument
Full range of
sources
used
selectively to
support
argument
The argument
is developed
but may lack
fluency
Argument
concise and
explicit
Coherent and
compelling
argument well
presented
Coherent and
compelling
argument well
presented
Coherent and
compelling
argument well
presented

Purchase answer to see full
attachment