Get Cheapest Assignment in Australia, UK, US, UAE, Canada and NZ Order Now

Research Skills 2 MOD006960

0 Comments

ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS MOD006960

Assessme ntCoursework (Essay)
Assessme nt element and code:Research Skills 2 014
Academic Year:2020/2021
Trimester:3
Module Title:Research Skills 2 (Skills for Higher Education)
Module Code:MOD006960
Level:3
Module Leader:Tanya Parsons
Word Limit:1500 words This excludes bibliography and other items listed in rule 6.75 of the Academic Regulations: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_re gs.pdf
Assessed Learning Outcomes1 – 3
Submissio n Deadline :This assignment must be received by no later than 14:00 Thursday 12th August 2021.

WRITING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:

  • This assignment must be completed individually.
  • You must use the Harvard referencing system.
  • Your work must indicate the number of words you have used.  Written assignments must not exceed the specified  maximum  number  of  words. When a written assignment is marked, the excessive use of words beyond the word limit is reflected in the academic judgement of the piece of work which results in a lower mark being awarded for the piece of work (regulation 6.74).
  • Assignment submissions are to be made anonymously. Do not write your name anywhere on your work.
  • Write your student ID number at the top of every page.
  • Where the assignment comprises more than one task, all tasks must be submitted in a single document.
  • You must number all pages.
Research Skills 2 MOD006960
Research Skills 2 MOD006960

SUBMITTING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:

In order to achieve full marks, you must submit your work before the deadline. Work that is submitted late – up to five working days after the published submission deadline – will be accepted and marked. However, the element of the module’s assessment to which the work contributes will be capped with a maximum mark of 40%.

Work cannot be submitted if the period of 5 working days after the deadline has passed (unless there is an approved extension). Failure to submit within the relevant period will mean that you have failed the assessment.

Requests for short-term extensions will only be considered in the case of illness or other cause considered valid by the Director of Studies Team. Please contact DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. A request must normally be received and agreed by the Director of Studies Team in writing at least 24 hours prior to the deadline. See rules 6.64-6.73: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf

Mitigation: The deadline for submission of mitigation in relation to this assignment is no later than five working days after the submission date of this work. Please contact the Director of Studies Team – DoS@london.aru.ac.uk.

See rules 6.112 – 6.141: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf

ASSIGNMENT QUESTION

Write a 1500-word essay that examines Social Cognitive theory factors in application to the case study on pp.6-7.

You are expected to examine aspects of personal, environmental, behavioural

factors from Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory model discussed in the course.

  • You must support your explanation with sources from the Reading List

THREE sources from the module’s Key Reading list and

ONE additional source from the Recommended Reading list that you can access through the Anglia Ruskin Library website

  • Your arguments should be clearly structured and written in an appropriate style.
Diagram  Description automatically generated

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

This is a skills module. As a result, you will be assessed on how well you have developed the research and writing skills practiced during the year.

Allocation of Marks

Your grade will be based on how well you address the following points:

  1. Task response: a direct answer to the task, supported by explanation of relevant theory, and direct application to an organisation from the case study.
  2. Structure: clear paragraphs and logical flow.
  3. Use of information from sources: including interpretation, evaluation and application.

4.          Clarity of expression.

Guidance

Make sure that you use texts from the reading list in the module guide, and that

additional sources you select are relevant and academic.

Points to consider

  • Be careful to make sure that you focus on the task. There is a lot that can be said about the organisations in the case study, but your task is specific, and you will be penalised for examining irrelevant points. Make sure that your essay is focused on how factors impact on conduct.
    • You might choose to examine some of the more complex sides of the model:
      • How the factors impact each other,
      • How the model relates to change
    • Note: managing your word count is challenging. You need to find a balance:
  • write about enough factors that your essay is a full response to the task, but
  • examine each factor in detail,
    • Interpreting the theory
    • Explaining the impact on factors, and
    • Applying the factor and its impact to the organisation.

On the VLE, you will find guidance on the key writing skills from the module.

  • Paragraph structure and flow.
    • Using theoretical models in your writing.
  • Applying theory to an organisational context.
    • Appropriateness of the sources for the academic assignment.

The guidance documents from Research Skills 1 will also be helpful

  • Writing in a clear and formal style.
    • Selecting relevant and reliable evidence from texts.
    • Using evidence from texts to support ideas in writing.
    • Interpreting and explaining sources in your own words.

Case Study: Grand UK Holidays

Coach tours for the elderly part 1

Grand UK Holidays is a tour company that specialises in escorted tours for the elderly. They offer bus holidays, cruises and holidays by train. The company has won awards for their service, and the When customers have special requirements, care staff accompany them on the tour. Managing Director Paul Bennett attributes the success to “a loyal and dedicated team, some of whom have been with the company since its beginnings in 1983”.

In preparation for Spring and Summer tours, the company have arranged a  number of training sessions for new staff. Some existing staff members have also been sent to the training to refresh and update key skills.

Training covers everything required to provide customers with a relaxing, worry- free time in good company. New staff were required to participate in the training. Also, some existing staff members were expected to take part in order to refresh and update their skills.

Training was carried out for

  • Tour managers
    • Care staff
    • Drivers
    • Administration

Training covered the exact service and holiday experience that customers expected and health and safety policies.

Some existing staff found the training frustrating for different reasons. Some resented having to do the training, and believed that they already knew how to do the job. Others were intimidated by the training, worried that they couldn’t learn as fast as younger staff. Also, there was frustration at any changes in the policies, believing that the old policies work fine.

Some new staff were frustrated by the training because they company wasn’t what they expected. They didn’t expect that they would be taking responsibility for elderly travellers. One new staff member panicked at the idea that there might be a health crisis during the trip. Another was disgusted at the idea of ‘singles holidays’ for old people that want to continue dating.

There was also a clash during the training between new staff members and existing staff members. They often sat at different tables, and the existing staff felt that the new staff wouldn’t listen to their advice. Some of the new staff members felt that they didn’t like being told what to do by fellow trainees.

However, there were many positive aspects of the training. Some were excited   by the idea of travelling more. Others thought it was great to know that people of all ages could still see the world. The opportunities for future pay rises and specialisation was also attractive.

Coach tours Part 2

People Dismiss Couch Tours Because of the False Stereotype

The practice is widespread. “Coach tours? Not for the likes of us! How ghastly!” Even pubs (“No Coaches”) may be against them. The image is of dimwit dotards being herded round places, thus ruining them. It is of undifferentiated masses clogging up service stations for the legendary “comfort stops”. It is, in short, poor. As Gavin Tollman said of his early days as the Geneva-based boss of Trafalgar: “I’d go to social events and say, ‘I run a tour company’ and people would say, ‘Oh yeah, old people in buses’.”

Coach Tours Offer Companionship

We’re on the terrace of a hotel in Orange – perhaps eight or nine of us, mid-way through a Provençal tour run by Bibby’s, a family firm from Ingleton. Conversation covers the day’s events – notably, a bull round-up in the Camargue – but also Newcastle United, golf, sheep-farming and, unexpectedly, the views of Richard Dawkins. Drinking is moderate, jollity less so. Elsewhere on the terrace, lone couples look across, clearly as jealous as hell. They are perhaps people who would never contemplate escorted tours. They’re now realising that they’re missing one of the tours’ greatest joys: built-in company.

As a coach tour insider said: “It helps if you like to meet other people and mix a little.” Certainly it does. That rules out the misanthropic. Otherwise… well, the perceived “undifferentiated mass” of coach tourists soon dissolves into its constituent individuals, and I’ve met some wonderful ones. (You can easily avoid the less wonderful. Spot where they’re sitting and sit somewhere else.)

Of course, they’ve mainly been older –  companies  suggest  average  customer ages are 50-plus. That’s good news for the tour operators. The grey market has bought its houses and cars, bid the kids farewell and so often has cash available. But it’s better news for the traveller. Older people are more interesting than youth. They have more to recount and less to prove. They’re also often well travelled and, though there are painful exceptions, well travelled people tend to be tolerant and good to get on with. Escorted tours provide an appropriate environment. On a Saga trip I took to Greece (the company lowered the minimum age for me, but only by minutes), there were several senior single ladies present. From them, I learned of the traumas of war-time evacuation to Canada, of top- class flat-green bowling in Sussex, of living rough with Bedouins, and of lost love in 1950s Kenya. (“I gave up everything – home, job, friends – then learned he was already married”.) Only an organised tour could offer (a) such women the security they needed for happy travelling and (b) the pleasure of their company for someone like me.

I’ve said it before but it’s maybe worth repeating that, on all the escorted trips I’ve been on, I’ve found myself among the Best of Britain on tour – civilised and funny, tolerant indeed, erudite and well mannered.

Nor do you absolutely have to be of mature years to benefit. For the last five decades, Contiki (contiki.com) has been taking 18-35 year-olds all over the place

(46 countries at the last count), sending them up mountains, onto boats, into the sea, museums and, most recently, rock festivals.

Shouldn’t young people be doing this stuff on their own? “We don’t take out the sense of adventure,” says Donna Jeavons, sales and marketing director. “What we do is mitigate the practical hassles – and then provide a large amount of freedom but in the context of also providing local expertise and really great experiences. Ones they’d not get on their own.” The 12-day Vietnam trip, for instance, takes in Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi, boating the Mekong and visiting Viet Cong tunnels but also a street food tour, mud bath and cookery classes in Hoi An. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/tours/escorted-tours-why-you-are-wrong-

about-coach-holidays/

ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS

Delete all criteria below except the criteria relevant to level of study for your assignment.

LEVEL 3 (was level 0)

Level 3 (Access) prepares students to function effectively at Level 4. Criteria for assessment at Level 3 reflect the preparatory nature of these modules. Students are expected to demonstrate the acquisition of generic learning skills appropriate for self-managed learning in an HE context. Students are expected to demonstrate that they have acquired the underpinning discipline- specific skills, knowledge and understanding necessary to undertake a programme of higher education
  Mark Bands  OutcomeGeneric Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2)
Knowledge & UnderstandingIntellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills
Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band    90- 100%                      Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level    Exceptional information base and understanding of ethical issuesExceptional management of learning resources. Exceptional leadership and contributions to teams. Structured and accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Exceptional practical/professional skills
      80-89%    Outstanding information base and understanding of ethical issuesOutstanding management of learning resources. Provides an exemplar of leadership and contributions to teams. Structured and accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Outstanding practical/professional skills
    70-79%    Excellent information base and understanding of ethical issuesExcellent management of learning resources. Contributes well to teams. Structured and largely accurate expression. excellent academic/ intellectual skills and practical/ professional skills
    60-69%    Good information base covering all major/ ethical issuesGood management of learning resources. Expression is structured and mainly accurate. Good academic/ intellectual skills. and team/practical/professional skills
     50-59%   Satisfactory information base covering most major issues and their ethical dimensionSatisfactory use of learning resources. Expression shows some lack of structure and/or accuracy. Acceptable but undistinguished skill sets. Satisfactory team/practical/ professional skills
      40-49%A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level    Basic information base; basic understanding of major/ ethical issues of disciplineBasic use of learning resources, with significant lack of structure and/or accuracy in expression. Some issues with academic/intellectual skills. Basic team/practical/ professional skills
          30-39%A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensatio n. Sat-isfies qualifying mark        Limited information base; limited understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension    Limited  use of learning resources with little contribution to team work. Weak academic/intellectual skills and difficulty with expression. Insecure practical/professional skills
    20-29%            Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensatio n available  Little evidence of an information base; little evidence of understanding of discipline and its ethical dimensionLittle evidence of use of learning resources with little evidence of contribution to team work. Very weak  academic/intellectual skills and difficulty with expression. Little evidence of practical/professional skills
    10-19%  Inadequate information base; inadequate understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension.Inadequate use of learning resources with Inadequate contribution to team work. Very weak academic/ intellectual skills and difficulty with expression. Inadequate practical/ professional skills
    1-9%  No evidence of any information base; no understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension.No evidence of use of learning resources with no evidence of contribution to team work. No evidence academic/ intellectual skills and incoherent expression. No evidence of practical/ professional skills
  0%Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *