BUS001 Coursework Assignment: 80% Individual Essay

Hello, if you have any need, please feel free to consult us, this is my wechat: wx91due

BUS001 Coursework Assignment: 80% Individual Essay

Due date:       TBD

Submission:    QMPLUS Turnitin

Please follow submission instructions and guidelines

Word Count:   1500-up to 2000 words (references excluded)

QMUL SBM policy allows for students to submit a word count 5% above the word count or 5% below the required word count.

Be mindful that exceeding well beyond the word count does not equal to better work! It is good academic discipline to stay within the required word count.

References:    As an academic assessment, you are required to use appropriate

resources. You must include academic resources, which also entail module readings.

You may also provide supporting evidence from reputable reports (e.g.,

Government websites, Case studies, News Reports, i.e., The

Guardian). Websites like mindtools.com, Wikipedia, etc., will not be acceptable sources for this assignment.

Please use Harvard Referencing Style.

AI-Assistance: You may use AI to draft text and refine your work, i.e., proofreading,

grammar, etc. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas. You must critically evaluate and modify any AI-generated content you use.

Tips:               You are expected to submit individual independent work.

Please construct an academic essay using appropriate language, style, structure, and referencing.

*Essay Task:     Consider the key components of Business Environment analysis (as discussed

in the module) and the effect of globalization on an organization’s strategy.

Describe and discuss how external environmental factors influence the internal  business environment. Explain your answer using two or more PESTLE factors  from the PESTLE framework. Reflect on globalization's benefits and challenges and identify at least one challenge or benefit to the internal business environment.

Marked

assignments exhibit the following

features

80-100 High 1st

70-79.9 1st

60-69.9 2:1

50-59.9 2:2

45-49.9 3rd

40-44.9 Lower 3rdpass

0-39 Fail

Quality of

information & Conclusions

Argument

structure very clear and

strong, high

level of rigour in inference. Focused

exclusively on explanation / evaluation

Argument

structure very clear and

strong.

Focused

exclusively on

explanation / evaluation

Argument

structure clear and strong

Principally

explanatory / evaluative

Argument

structure either clear or strong but not both

Largely

descriptive

Argument

structure

lacking in

clarity and / or

strength Mainly descriptive

Argument poorly

structured. Purely

descriptive

No clear

argument Purely descriptive,

perhaps vague even in

description

Critical

Thinking

Exceptional analysis,

synthesis and critique

Excellent

analysis,

synthesis and critique

Very good

analysis,

synthesis and critique

Good analysis, synthesis and critique

Weak analysis, synthesis and critique

Poor analysis, synthesis and  critique

Very poor

analysis,

synthesis and critique

Structure

Very strongly,

clearly

logically

structured, headings

grounded in clear

principles of inference from evidence to

conclusion

Strongly,

clearly

logically

structured, headings

grounded in clear

principles of inference

from evidence to conclusion

Competently

structured,

headings

grounded in

some principles of inference

from evidence to conclusion

Adequately

structured,

with headings bearing some relationship

with logic of argument

Weaknesses in structuring

and/or in

subheadings

Serious

weaknesses in organisation

and structure of the essay

No clear

organisation or structure to the essay

Referencing

Broad number of sources

drawn from. Good use of in-text

citations and referencing

listed in

Harvard style

Broad number of sources

drawn from. Good use of in-text

citations and referencing

listed in

Harvard style

Good number

of sources

drawn from and referenced.

Good number of sources

drawn from and

referenced.

Some citations but inadequate referencing

Few sources

drawn from but not properly

cited

Poor sources/ no referencing



发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注