Performance descriptors<\/strong><\/p>\nPerformance 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.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nCriterion No.<\/strong><\/td>\nGrade Descriptor<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| \u00a0<\/strong>1<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nContent<\/strong><\/td>\n| Distinction 70% to 100%<\/strong>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.<\/p>\n 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<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Merit 60% to 69%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Provides evidence of innovative thought in consideration to academic models and theoretical frameworks.\u00a0 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<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Pass 50% to 59%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Demonstrates and attempts to provide satisfactory, sound academic content in terms of models and ideas, but with some omissions.\u00a0 Demonstrates some comprehension of topic area.\u00a0 Provides an indication of the range of alternative viewpoints which may include limited evidence of independent thought. Harvard referencing system in evidence.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Marginal fail 40% to 49%<\/strong>A descriptive account which demonstrates limited understanding or insight into the area under discussion and the theoretical concepts.\u00a0 Some reference to literature but this of a narrow range. Little or no Harvard referencing system in evidence.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nFail 0% to 39%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Limited consideration of area of concern, little reference to academic models. Understanding of literature not demonstrated. Very evidence of addressing the tasks as set.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| \u00a0<\/strong>2.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nAnalysis<\/strong><\/td>\n| Distinction 70% to 100%<\/strong>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.\u00a0 Demonstrates a clear ability to critically analyse and synthesise information and ideas.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Merit 60% to 69%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Response demonstrates a good awareness of the prescribed literature showing evidence of the ability to evaluate contrasting view points and drawing conclusions.\u00a0 Uses different arguments or perspectives with the use of appropriate references and critical analysis.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Pass 50% to 59%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Provides some evidence of critical analysis through an understanding of the existence of alternative viewpoints.\u00a0 Attempts to analyse and evaluate theories and concepts using literature references to a satisfactory level. Shows some weaknesses in level and depth of analysis<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Marginal fail 40% to 49%\u00a0 <\/strong>Little evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation.\u00a0 Limited knowledge and understanding demonstrated with little use of theory, different perspectives, ideas or academic analysis.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Fail 0% to 39%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>No evidence of analysis or evaluation insufficient demonstration of knowledge and comprehension.\u00a0 No or little use of perspectives or analysis. No evidence of independent thought.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| \u00a0<\/strong>3.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nApplication<\/strong><\/td>\nDistinction 70% to 100%<\/strong>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.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Merit 60% to 69%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>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.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nPass 50% to 59%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Demo\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Demonstrates an attempt to integrate theoretical concepts with\u00a0 management and professional practice.\u00a0 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.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Marginal fail 40% to 49%\u00a0 <\/strong>Implications for professional practice are considered in a superficial or inappropriate manner.\u00a0 Academic theories and ideas are poorly applied.\u00a0 No consideration is given to the implications of theory.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Fail 0% to 39%<\/strong>Little or no insight regarding the application of academic ideas or integration of theory and practice.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| \u00a0<\/strong>4.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nWritten<\/strong><\/p>\nCommunication<\/strong><\/td>\n| Distinction 70% to 100%<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Respo\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Responses are written in a systematic, clear and concise manner.\u00a0 Response incorporates a wide range of reference sources including academic journals. Consistent use of the Harvard Referencing System. Presented to a very high standard.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Merit 60% to 69%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>RespR\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Responses are written in a suitable academic style.<\/p>\n Responses incorporate relevant professional \/ academic journals. Systematic and clear presentation using appropriate language and grammar. Consistent use of the Harvard Referencing System.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Pass 50% to 59%\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Responses are written in a generally coherent manner,\u00a0 but have some weakness in structure or clarity.\u00a0 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.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Marginal fail 40% to 49% <\/strong>Responses are generally coherent but with no clear structure. There is limited or no use of the Harvard referencing system.\u00a0 Flow and use of language are inappropriate in places and not sufficiently presented to the necessary standard.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n| Fail 0% to 39%<\/strong>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.<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n To get answer chat with online assignment adviser<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"Hire](\"https:\/\/casestudyhelp.com\/images\/hire-best-assignment-experts-online.gif\") <\/a><\/p>\n\n Ask Your\u00a0<\/span><\/b>Human Resource Management Assignment Question<\/span><\/b><\/a>?<\/span><\/b>
\nCheck out our\u00a0<\/b><\/span>HR Management Assignment Service<\/span><\/b><\/a>
\nFind Your\u00a0<\/b><\/span>MBA Assignment Experts<\/span><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
![\"Order](\"https:\/\/casestudyhelp.com\/sample-questions\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/Oerder-Now.png\")
<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n