Australia
UK
USA
- Case StudyHelp.com
- Sample Questions
7HR003 Leading Managing and Developing People
| Review and critically evaluate the practice, relevance and contribution of HRM and HRD to organisational success and effective change management, using major contemporary research and debates in the field of HR. |
| Evaluate the characteristics of effective leadership, motivation commitment and engagement, within organisational settings. |
| Identify and evaluate the influences of professionalism and personal ethical approaches to HR practices in organisations |
| Critically evaluate personal communications and professional skills. |
Assessment Brief
The detailed requirements for this task are as follows:
| Can an argument be made that Human Resource Development (HRD) adds value to organisations?
3000 words
(You should ensure that you engage critically with theory and support your answer with relevant references throughout)
|
The following information is important when:
- Preparing for your assessment
- Checking your work before you submit it
- Interpreting feedback on your work after marking.
Assessment Criteria
The module learning Outcomes tested by this assessment task are indicated on page 1. The precise criteria against which your work will be marked are as follows:
- Content
- Analysis
- Application
- Written Communication
Performance descriptors
Performance descriptors indicate how marks will be arrived at against each of the above criteria. The descriptors indicate the likely characteristics of work that is marked within the percentage bands indicated.
| Criterion No. | Grade Descriptor | |
| 1
Content |
Distinction 70% to 100%Response demonstrates a very high degree of originality or independence of thought with an excellent capacity to express views in an articulate and concise manner.
Evidence of a comprehensive insight of the subject which incorporates appropriate theoretical ideas and concepts, definitions, context implications and critical awareness. All areas of the question fully addressed. Consistent Harvard referencing system in evidence
|
|
| Merit 60% to 69% Provides evidence of innovative thought in consideration to academic models and theoretical frameworks. Provides a comprehensive overview of the key topic under consideration including theory, definitions and context, with the question mainly addressed. Consistent Harvard referencing system in evidence
|
||
| Pass 50% to 59% Demonstrates and attempts to provide satisfactory, sound academic content in terms of models and ideas, but with some omissions. Demonstrates some comprehension of topic area. Provides an indication of the range of alternative viewpoints which may include limited evidence of independent thought. Harvard referencing system in evidence.
|
||
| Marginal fail 40% to 49%A descriptive account which demonstrates limited understanding or insight into the area under discussion and the theoretical concepts. Some reference to literature but this of a narrow range. Little or no Harvard referencing system in evidence.
|
||
| Fail 0% to 39% Limited consideration of area of concern, little reference to academic models. Understanding of literature not demonstrated. Very evidence of addressing the tasks as set. | ||
| 2.
Analysis |
Distinction 70% to 100%Uses current and traditional literature and ideas and is able to take a strongly comparative and critical view of a variety of theories, concepts, knowledge claims, alternative frames of reference with regard to the topic. Demonstrates a clear ability to critically analyse and synthesise information and ideas.
|
|
| Merit 60% to 69% Response demonstrates a good awareness of the prescribed literature showing evidence of the ability to evaluate contrasting view points and drawing conclusions. Uses different arguments or perspectives with the use of appropriate references and critical analysis.
|
||
| Pass 50% to 59% Provides some evidence of critical analysis through an understanding of the existence of alternative viewpoints. Attempts to analyse and evaluate theories and concepts using literature references to a satisfactory level. Shows some weaknesses in level and depth of analysis
|
||
| Marginal fail 40% to 49% Little evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation. Limited knowledge and understanding demonstrated with little use of theory, different perspectives, ideas or academic analysis.
|
||
| Fail 0% to 39% No evidence of analysis or evaluation insufficient demonstration of knowledge and comprehension. No or little use of perspectives or analysis. No evidence of independent thought.
|
||
| 3.
Application |
Distinction 70% to 100%Good evidence of application of theoretical concepts to working environments. Utilises ideas and concepts through developing them further in order to provide new or alternative ideas regarding implications in an innovative manner . Excellent discussion of contextual aspects. Creates links between theory and practice following effective critical analysis. Identifies and evaluates evidence of good practice citing recent cases. Produces well prepared recommendations. | |
| Merit 60% to 69% Evidence of the integration of academic concepts in developing management and professional practice including relevant examples and cases cited. Demonstrates the ability to consider the implications of theoretical ideas and areas for development within organisations using ideas of others. The work identifies areas of good practice, with appropriate recommendations.
|
||
| Pass 50% to 59% Demo Demonstrates an attempt to integrate theoretical concepts with management and professional practice. Cites some examples and cases but provides limited evidence of critical analysis. Outlines alternative ideas regarding implications of application of the theories examined and discussed. | ||
| Marginal fail 40% to 49% Implications for professional practice are considered in a superficial or inappropriate manner. Academic theories and ideas are poorly applied. No consideration is given to the implications of theory.
|
||
| Fail 0% to 39%Little or no insight regarding the application of academic ideas or integration of theory and practice.
|
||
| 4.
Written Communication |
Distinction 70% to 100%
Respo Responses are written in a systematic, clear and concise manner. Response incorporates a wide range of reference sources including academic journals. Consistent use of the Harvard Referencing System. Presented to a very high standard. |
|
| Merit 60% to 69% RespR Responses are written in a suitable academic style.
Responses incorporate relevant professional / academic journals. Systematic and clear presentation using appropriate language and grammar. Consistent use of the Harvard Referencing System.
|
||
| Pass 50% to 59% Responses are written in a generally coherent manner, but have some weakness in structure or clarity. Satisfactory use of Harvard referencing system including some relevant professional/academic journals. Mainly uses appropriate language and grammar. The work is presented to a satisfactory standard. Presentation and language to a minimum satisfactory standard.
|
||
| Marginal fail 40% to 49% Responses are generally coherent but with no clear structure. There is limited or no use of the Harvard referencing system. Flow and use of language are inappropriate in places and not sufficiently presented to the necessary standard.
|
||
| Fail 0% to 39%Responses to questions fail to address the set tasks with little or no reference to appropriate literature. Possibly coherent but with no clear structure. Limited or no use of the Harvard Referencing System. Flow and use of language are inappropriate throughout.
|
||
To get answer chat with online assignment adviser
Ask Your Human Resource Management Assignment Question?
Check out our HR Management Assignment Service
Find Your MBA Assignment Experts
