ASSIGNMENT 2 – QUESTION, BACKGROUND INFORMATION, AND MARKING Guidance
The final assessment of the module was supposed to be an individual exam. Due to the circumstances, this has been adjusted to an online individual essay. The essay will utilise the questions that were intended for the exam, and as in the exam, students will have a choice of answering ONE out of the two exam questions. This assignment directly links to module learning outcomes 2, 4, and 5.
Assessment Weighting: 50% of the overall module grade.
Word Count: 1000 words (this is a definitive word count including everything bar the reference list; there is no +/- 10% for this assignment).
Questions: Students must choose only ONE of the questions to answer.
1. Critically discuss how open innovation practices can affect firm innovation?
2. Critically discuss the market and system failure rationales for government intervention in firm innovation activity?
Submission: Electronically via Turnitin. No paper submission is required, or will be looked at.
WHAT TO DO IN THE EVENT THAT TURNITIN IS NOT AVAILABLE:
• Check the module site on Blackboard for any announcements regarding assignment submission.
• If there are no announcements, notify your tutor, particularly if you experience problems within 24 hours of the assessment deadline. Wherever possible, do so using your DMU email account.
• If the problems occurred during or after you submitted your work, keep the submission receipt (and receipt number) for the Turnitin submission. Also record any possible error messages displayed. If you are able to do so, take a picture or a screen-grab of the error message. Please include these in your email notification to the tutor.
• If you are unable to upload your assignment due to Turnitin failure, please submit your work via email to the assessing tutor or the Module Leader to meet the original deadline.
• Students will not be penalised for the late submission of work if there is a technical failure in the mechanism for submission (eg Blackboard). If necessary, an alternative method of submission will be made available and a new deadline set.
Deadline: Thursday 14th May at 12pm (Midday). Submission after this will incur university penalties.
The below mark scheme, in addition to the De Montfort University Undergraduate Generic Mark Descriptors (included below), will be utilised to grade the submitted work. The marking scheme is generic and applies to both questions. The guidance provided in the context of the lectures for each question is still applicable.
Sections Section Guidance
1. Introduction • Has the student provided adequate background information?
• Has the student defined the key terms in their essay?
2. Main Body • Has the student drawn on and discussed a range of studies from the academic (i.e. journal articles and books) literature?
• Has the student shown a depth of knowledge on the key constructs of their question (e.g., open innovation or market/system failure)?
• Has the student engaged in a critical evaluation and discussion?
3. Quality of Conclusions Drawn • Does the conclusion provide a clear answer to the essay question?
• Has the student drawn an appropriate conclusion based on the evidence and arguments presented in their essay?
• Does the student justify and explain their conclusion?
4. Structure and Organisation of Essay. Referencing Quality, and Formatting/ • Is the essay well organised and clearly structured?
• Are references cited appropriately?
• Does a significant proportion of the references used come from academic (journal articles and books) sources, rather than online sources?
DMU GENERIC UNDERGRADUATE MARK DESCRIPTORS
Modules are marked on a range of 0-100%. Mark descriptors are given in the table below.
These descriptors are inter-related: with regard to marks of 40 and above there is an assumption that in awarding marks in one band work will have met the requirements of the previous band; with regard to marks of 39 and below there is an assumption that in awarding marks in one band work will NOT have met the requirements of the previous higher band. When marking an individual piece of work there is an expectation that it will clearly demonstrate most of the criteria within each band.
Mark Range Criteria Degree Classification Boundary
90%-100% • Responds to all of the assessment criteria for the task.
• Displays exceptional degree of originality.
• Exceptional analytical, problem-solving and/or creative skills
• No fault can be found with the work other than very minor errors, for example minor typographical issues First Class Honours
80%-90% • Responds to all of the assessment criteria for the task.
• Work of outstanding quality, evidenced by an ability to engage critically and analytically with source material.
• Likely to exhibit independent lines of argument.
• Highly original and/or creative responses.
• Extremely wide range of relevant sources used where appropriate. First Class Honours
70%-79% • Responds to all of the assessment criteria for the task.
• An extremely, well developed response showing clear knowledge and the ability to interpret and/or apply that knowledge.
• An authoritative grasp of the subject, significant originality and insight,
• Significant evidence of ability to sustain an argument, to think analytically, critically and/or creatively and to synthesise material.
• Evidence of extensive study, appropriate to task. First Class Honours
60%-69% • Responds to most of the assessment criteria for the task.
• A detailed response demonstrating a thorough grasp of theory, understanding of concepts, principles, methodology and content.
• Clear evidence of insight and critical judgement in selecting, ordering and analysing content.
• Demonstrates ability to synthesise material, to construct responses and demonstrate creative skills which reveal insight and may offer some originality.
• Draws on an appropriate range of properly referenced sources. Upper Second-Class Honours (2:1)
50%-59% • Responds to most of the assessment criteria for the task.
• An effective response demonstrating evidence of a clear grasp of relevant material, principles and key concepts
• An ability to construct and organise arguments.
• Some degree of critical analysis, insight and creativity.
• Demonstrating some conceptual ability, critical analysis and a degree of insight.
• Accurate, clearly written/presented Lower Second Class Honours (2:2)
40%-49% • Responds to some of the assessment criteria for the task.
• A response demonstrating an understanding of basic points and principles sufficient to show that some of learning outcomes/assessment criteria have been achieved at a basic level.
• Suitably organised work demonstrating a reasonable level of understanding
• Covers the basic subject matter and is appropriately presented but is rather too derivative and insufficiently analytical.
• Demonstrates limited conceptual ability, levels of evaluation and demonstration of creative skills.
• Demonstrates adherence to the referencing conventions appropriate to the subject and/or task. Third Class Honours
30%-39% • Overall insufficient response to the assessment criteria.
• A weak response, which, while addressing some elements of the task, contains significant gaps and inaccuracies.
• Indicates an answer that shows only weakly developed elements of understanding and/or other skills appropriate to the task.
• May contain weaknesses in presentation that constitute a significant obstacle in communicating meaning to the assessor. Fail
20%-29% • Overall insufficient response to the assessment criteria.
• A poor response, which falls substantially short of achieving the learning outcomes.
• Demonstrates little knowledge and/or other skills appropriate to the task.
• Little evidence of argument and/or coherent use of material. Fail
10%-19% • Overall insufficient response to the assessment criteria.
• A very poor response demonstrating few relevant facts.
• Displays only isolated or no knowledge and/or other skills appropriate to the task.
• Little adherence to the task. Fail
0%-9% • Overall insufficient response to the assessment criteria.
• Displays virtually no knowledge and/or other skills appropriate to the task.
• Work is inappropriate to assessment task given. Fail