BMS501 Topic Debate and Reflection
Foundation Degree in Business and Management (Year 2)
Personal and Professional Development 2 (Module BMS501)
School of Business, Management and Professional
TITLE: Topical Debate and Reflection
Completion of this work will satisfy the following learning outcomes from module BMS501:
LO1 – Apply critical thinking skills to develop a supported argument.
LO4 – Critically evaluate the transferable skills developed on the course.
You willconsider a contentious issue relating to the business sector and engage in a structured debate. All students should put forward a supported argument, either for or against, demonstrating a range of research applied to support their argument. In the planning stage you will decide what to argue for and against on the debate. Each student will be required to produce a report that encompass the arguments to be presented, for and against research should be included. (LO1)
Each student is also to produce a reflection to critically evaluate the transferable skills demonstrated within the preparation for the debate. Consider how the skills learnt on the course to date have supported and enabled you to complete this task. (LO4)
Other relevant assessment information:
- You will need to include and reference at least 6 different sources including 3 academic textbooks, 1 academic journal and reputable news articles that help provide supporting evidence for any assertions that you make within the debate, this will be assessed through your supporting notes.
- Your engagement within the debate will be assessed through the analysis within the report.
- The completion of your work will satisfy 50% of the assessment for this module. Word count for your Debate report is 1,000 (+ or – 10%). The reflection should be 1,000 words (+ or – 10%). Your notes, including your research and reflection should be submitted online, through Turnitin. You must include both a reference list and bibliography.
Submission Date: 9th June 2021
The skills development opportunities identified in this assignment are:
- Development of speaking skills through a debate
- Apply appropriate leadership and management skills in planning and preparing a debate.
- Create a structured argument.
- Demonstrate and evaluate transferable skills.
- Take a holistic approach to problem solving.
|Plan and engage in a debate. Apply critical thinking to support an argument. Produce a reflection to critically evaluate transferable skills||Comprehensive notes produced associated with the argument presented. All sides of the argument considered and critically analysed. Impartial presentation of facts to support the argument demonstrating critical thinking skills. Clear structure of the topic to be presented within the debate. Topic debated managed effectively. Good use of business language Reflection that critically evaluates the skills demonstrated in the planning and preparation for the debate, theory on transferable skills to underpin your evaluation, consideration of skills developed over the course should be explored. Attribution of higher grades are associate with: good use of spelling, grammar and punctuation throughout all written workeffective use of the Harvard referencing format.evidence of wide reading around topics to support arguments and reflection.judgements made and conclusions drawn supported by business theory evident within all written work.||30 20 50|
Undergraduate Generic Marking Criteria Foundation Degree Level 5
|Level 5 (Foundation Degree/Diploma)||Classification||Level 5 (Foundation Degree/Diploma)||Classification||Level 5 (Foundation Degree/Diploma)||Classification|
|90%-100% Exceptional work with presentation of the highest standard. The work contains coherent arguments and ideas. There is a detailed understanding of subject matter and critical analysis of issues/problems. Points are made clearly and concisely, always substantiated by appropriate use of source material. There is evidence of a sound ability to critically interrelate theories with examples from practice where appropriate.||Distinction*||80%-89% Outstanding work with presentation of a very high standard. There is comprehensive understanding of key concepts and knowledge and evidence of critical analysis and insight. Accurate interpretation of data with arguments, ideas and solutions presented effectively and based on strong research and reading.||Distinction*||70%-79% Extremely good work with presentation of a high standard. Evidence of strong knowledge and understanding together with some critical analysis and insight. Source material is used effectively to support arguments, ideas and solutions.||Distinction*|
|60%-69% Very good presentation. Sound knowledge and understanding with an emerging ability to critically engage with and apply the concepts involved linking them to practice where appropriate. Good use of source material which supports most points clearly. Content is wholly relevant and is coherently structured.||Distinction||50%-59% Presentation is of a good standard but some shortcomings. Evidence of a sound knowledge base but limited critical and practical application of concepts and ideas. Content is largely relevant although points may not always be clear and structure may lack coherence. Contains some critical reflection and some use of source material to illustrate points.||Merit||40%-49% Adequate presentation. The work is descriptive and/or lacks critical analysis where required but is relevant with limited though sufficient evidence of knowledge and understanding. There is some evidence of reading although arguments/ proposals/solutions often lack coherence and may be unsubstantiated by relevant source material or partially flawed. Links to practice are made where appropriate.||Pass|
|30%-39% Poorly structured, incoherent and wholly descriptive work. Evidence of a weak knowledge base with some key aspects not addressed and use of irrelevant material. Flawed use of techniques. Limited evidence of appropriate reading and no evidence of critical thought. Little reference to practice where appropriate.||Fail||20-29% Very poorly structured, incoherent and wholly descriptive work. Evidence of a very weak knowledge base with many key omissions and much material irrelevant. Use of inappropriate or incorrect techniques. Very little evidence of appropriate reading and no evidence of critical thought. No links to practice where appropriate. To obtain a mark of 20% the work must show evidence of a genuine attempt to engage with the assessment requirements and with the subject matter.||Fail||0-19 % The work is extremely poorly structured and presented. It demonstrates no real knowledge or understanding of key concepts and principles. Much material is irrelevant, incorrect or omitted. No evidence of critical thought. No effective use of supporting material. No links to practice where appropriate. Not a genuine attempt to engage with the assessment requirements and/or subject matter.||Fail|