Task- Module Assignment Brief Programme: Business & Tourism Management Level: Level 6 Module Title: Research Methods 2 Module code: BTM6RME Module leader/s: Assignment No: 1 Assignment Type: Presentation - Individual Assignment weighting %: 25%

Assignment Requirements
Overview

This assignment requires the students to deliver an individual presentation of their research proposal. It aims to evaluate their ability to effectively communicate their chosen research field, research idea, objectives, literature review, and methodology. This assessment is a key component of their final year, designed to showcase their skills and knowledge in presenting academic research.

Students must explain and justify their research design, theoretical framework, methodology, data collection, analysis, and research timeline. The presentation may be used in different contexts, such as jobs in the tourism sector or academic settings, where students need to address theoretical or practical issues.

Clear, concise, and convincing oral presentation skills, supported by appealing slides, are essential for future professionals in Business and Tourism Management. Additionally, students must demonstrate the ability to handle questions effectively and justify their decisions.

This assignment will be presented in Week 5 and serves as preparation for the final project dissertation at Level 6. Students are expected to demonstrate achievement of learning objectives, including knowledge and understanding of research design approaches and the ability to evaluate various methods and techniques for primary or secondary data gathering and analysis.

Emphasis is on the presentation of the literature review for students to demonstrate an understanding of the research in their chosen field of study. This is crucial for building a strong theoretical foundation for the proposed research. Additionally, students are required to consider ethical, practical, and theoretical considerations and limitations of their research.

Assignment task/s to be completed
Individual presentation of the research proposal will repeat the written research proposal in some parts, but will substantially develop the following:
Rationale for the research, stating and justifying the research problem, aim, objectives and research approach.
Key (seminal) research studies from the literature review.
Theoretical framework (theories to be used to answer the aim and objectives)
Gap in the research or evidence of the research necessity, e.g. from reports.
Research methodology.
Proposed outcomes of the research and personal contribution.

This assignment offers students the chance to showcase their skills in comprehending and interpreting information related to research methodology and presenting it effectively to diverse audiences, encompassing academic and business contexts.

Specifically, students are tasked with delivering their previously written research proposal, which is a 3000-word document accompanied by required appendices, in a presentation format.

Students will need to prepare a PowerPoint presentation and present the proposal orally in class. They must be able to respond to questions concerning theoretical framework, previous research, gaps in the research, and practical and theoretical implications with appropriate referencing to the relevant primary and secondary resources. In addition, they will need to justify their interest and role in future research.

Additional Information required to support completing the tasks above
Students will create their own template and structure for the PowerPoint presentation.
However, the total presentation should not exceed 15 slides.

Assessment Requirements:
Demonstrate why you are personally interested in this topic and reflect in your research interest.
Explain your research aim and objectives.
Explain and highlight the key studies in the field, found from your literature review.
Illustrate the theory or theories you will adopt to analyse your research topic.
Explain the methodology that underpins your research.
Mandatory Referencing and Research Requirements
Referencing Style
CCCU Harvard Referencing Style.
Mandatory Sources to be included in the Assignment
Essential Resources (available on shelves and electronically in GBS library)
Bell, E., Bryman, A. and Harley, B. (2019). Business Research Methods. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flick, U. (2020) Introducing research methodology: Thinking your way through your research project. London: SAGE.
Robson, C. and McKartan, K. (2015) Real World Research, 4th ed. A resource for Users of Social Research Methods in Applied Settings. West Sussex: Wiley.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2019). Research Methods for Business Students. 8th ed. Harlow: Pearson.
Tracy, S.J. (2020) Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, Communicating Impact. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Format of your submission and how your assignment will be assessed
This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time).
Please ensure your work has been saved in an appropriate file format (Microsoft Word). Your PowerPoint presentation will have speaker notes and then will be saved as the Word Document Handouts with speaker notes below slides. The text in the slides and the speaker notes, the scheme of the theoretical framework, and the materials in the appendices to the proposal, will comprise 1000 words. Please note that you do not need to repeat all the text of the proposal in the speaker notes and the slides, though some parts will be repeated. However, some parts will require a different presentation than in the research proposal.
You can submit your work as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your work more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version.
Once you have submitted your work, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be sent to your forwarded e-mail address (provided you have set this up). Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original electronic copy of your assignment
You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website: Academic Misconduct Policy. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.

Assessment Criteria:

Clarity and coherence of the presentation: Your presentation will be assessed based on the clarity of the slides and speaker notes, including the organization of content and the logical flow of ideas.

Depth and relevance of the literature review: Your literature review will be evaluated based on its depth and relevance, demonstrating your understanding of the chosen research field, including the identification of key theories, concepts, and gaps in the literature.

Justification of research design and methodology: The effectiveness of your justification for the chosen research design, methodology, data collection methods, and analysis techniques will be assessed.

Integration of theoretical framework: Your presentation will be evaluated based on the integration of the theoretical framework, including the coherence of the theoretical model or flowchart and its alignment with the literature review.

Quality of proposed outcomes and research feasibility: The clarity and feasibility of your proposed research outcomes, as well as the justification provided for the research timeline, practical limitations, and strategies for addressing them, will be assessed.

Use of references and adherence to guidelines: Your use of references will be evaluated for accuracy and appropriateness, as well as adherence to formatting guidelines and submission instructions.

Overall presentation skills and engagement: Your oral presentation skills, including clarity of speech, engagement with the audience, and ability to respond to questions effectively, will be assessed.

Originality and academic integrity: The demonstration of original thought and adherence to academic integrity principles, including proper citation and avoidance of plagiarism, will be evaluated.

Marking Scheme / Rubric - The Marking Scheme (otherwise known as a rubric) is below:

Submission Requirements
Submission Platform
This assignment should be submitted electronically using Moodle to the Module Submission link.
Submission Date &Time
All submission & resubmission dates and time are as stated at the beginning of this Assignment brief.

You should submit your Assignment for all deadlines earlier than 2:00pm on the date stated.

Late submissions can be accepted for Summative Submissions only up to a maximum of 2 working days after the submission deadline. This does not apply to resubmission deadlines. A 10 mark deduction will be made by CCCU for all late submissions.

Work submitted more than two working days after the deadline will not be accepted and will be recorded as a non-submission.

Assignments submitted to the Resubmissions deadlines will be capped at 40 by CCCU.

If you are affected by events which are unexpected, outside your control and short-term in nature (i.e. lasting one to two weeks), under the exceptional circumstances procedure you may be eligible for:

A seven day extension to your coursework (via self-certification request).
A 14 day extension to your coursework (via evidence-based request).
To defer your exam or time-constrained assessment if you have not yet submitted/attempted it (via self-certification or evidence-based request).
To re-take an exam/time-constrained assessment, if you feel your performance on your first attempt was negatively impacted (via impaired performance request).

Please note students are only eligible to have a maximum of 2 self-certification requests per academic year.

You can make a self-certification request up to 14 calendar days before your deadline:
for coursework it must be no later than 2pm on the deadline date
for exams and time-constrained assessments, the request must be submitted no later than the start time of the assessment.

Table of Penalties
Issue with the Assignment
Penalty to be Applied
Suspected Academic Misconduct or Breach of Academic integrity
The Assignment will be graded zero. Written feedback will be ‘This assignment has been identified as potential Academic Misconduct/Breach of Academic Integrity. You will be invited to a meeting to discuss’.

You will be invited to a meeting with an academic Misconduct reviewer. When you attend the meeting if Academic Misconduct or the breach of Academic Integrity is upheld you will be asked to rewrite the section of the assignment it applies to and re-submit the assignment.

Do not upload any assignments to the AMC submission links before the meeting otherwise it will be removed.

Failure to attend the meeting means the assignment will remain graded at zero and you will be unable to pass the module until you have attended the meeting.
The assignment is more than 10% over the prescribed wordcount i.e. for 3,000 words, if 3,400 is submitted excluding the cover page, table of contents, references and appendices.
A 10-mark deduction applied to the overall grade that is manually entered by the Lecturer. This deduction is capped at 40%, which means an assignment cannot get less than 40% if a deduction has to be made.

For example, if the mark for the assignment was 60. The lecturer would deduct 10 marks, and the mark will be 50. Written feedback will also state ‘This assignment is 10% over the wordcount and 10 marks have been deducted’.
Where assignments are more than 10% less than the prescribed wordcount and lecturers cannot identify if the learning outcomes have been met.
This assignment will be graded below 40.
Where a student submits a .pdf instead of a word document.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This is a pdf submission and is not allowed. All submissions should be in Microsoft Word format’.
Students not working in their groups as agreed by the lecturer.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This submission was not completed in the designated group’.

Please note: Where a student has asked the lecturer to move from their original group and the lecturer has agreed this does not apply.
For a presentation assignment that requires oral delivery, and the student does not present in person.
The Oral rubric criteria is not moved, and the oral criteria will remain at zero.
For a presentation assignment and the student does not upload a converted PPT To Word File with speaker notes.
The communication rubric criteria is not moved, and the communication criteria will remain at zero.
For a presentation assignment that requires oral delivery, and the student did not present on the day or upload the presentation to a Word document with speaker Notes.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘There was no Oral presentation in class and the submission was not converted to Microsoft Word’.
For a presentation assignment the student uploads a file that contains no slides and is simply continuous text.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘There are no slides present in the assignment submission’.
If the assignment is group work and the resubmission is not changed to individual work.

If a group assignment is failed, then the resubmitted work must be changed by a minimum of 25% to make it an individual piece of work.

This means if a Group Presentation is 12 slides a minimum of 3 must be different to the group submission. If the assignment is a Group Poster with 6 text boxes, then a minimum of 2 of them must be different to the Group Poster.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This resubmission should be individual and a minimum of 25% of the assignment has not changed’.
Where a written assignment has text that is unable to be read by Turnitin because it is either a graphical image (excluding Presentations & Posters); for example, a screenshot or the assignment is written within text boxes on each page.
This assignment will be graded 0 and the written feedback should state ‘This assignment is unreadable by Turnitin and cannot be checked for Academic Misconduct. It has been referred for an AMC meeting’.

The assignment will then be referred for Academic Misconduct investigation.
An assignment that does not make use of any Mandatory references provided in the assignment brief/Module Handbook.
The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero
An assignment has a reference list, but no citations.
The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero.
Written feedback should state ’The reference criteria has been graded Zero as no citations have been used. Please include citations in your assignment to support the academic points being made’.
An assignment has no citations and no reference list.
Foundation & Level 4 - The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero. The written feedback will state ‘Please ensure that you use citations and references to support your assignment submission’.

At Level 5 and Level 6 this would be graded as a Fail. The lecturer will grade as 1 and written feedback will also show ‘This assignment has no citations and no reference list’.
Where False references are included in an assignment.
This will be referred for Academic Misconduct.

This assignment will be graded 0 and the written feedback should state ‘This assignment contains false references and has been referred for Academic Misconduct. You will be invited to attend an Academic Misconduct meeting’.
Assignment is submitted after the Late Deadline or if it is a Resubmission, after the Resubmission deadline
This assignment will be graded a Fail.

The lecturer will grade as 1 and written feedback should state 'This assignment was submitted after the deadline. Please resubmit at the next resubmission opportunity.'

Student Integrity and Academic Misconduct
The values of student integrity expected by CCCU are:
Honesty – being clear about what your work is and where your ideas come from other sources.
Trust – others can have faith in you being open about your work and acknowledging others’ work.
Fairness – you do not try to gain an unfair advantage in using others’ work.
Responsibility – you take an active role in applying the principle of Academic Integrity to your work.
Respect – you show respect for the work of others.
Peer-support:
Students might choose to get support from their peers when preparing assessments, such as discussing the subject of the assessment, exchanging ideas, and receiving suggestions for improving the work. This is peer-support, and the University accepts this as a reasonable expectation when completing assessments. However, peers must not make any changes to anyone’s assessments as such actions could lead to allegations of academic misconduct.

Use of English as the medium of assessment:
Students cannot write an assessment in another language and subsequently translate their work into English or have it translated by any form of third-party. Use of translation software or third-party translators is a form of academic misconduct.

Artificial Intelligence (AI):
Students must write the entire assessment without using AI software such as ChatGPT. Submitting an assessment that contains any form of AI is a form of academic misconduct.

Proofreading:
Students can make use of Microsoft Word’s grammar and spell-checking functions but the use of Grammarly is not allowed as it uses AI text generation. If student’s use third-party proofreaders, these cannot make any changes that alter the assessment in anyway including correcting language or citation format errors. Third-party alterations to the assessment are a form of academic misconduct.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism can be defined as incorporating another person’s material from books, journals, the internet, another student’s work, or any other source into assessment material without acknowledgement. It includes:
Using exactly the same words (sentences, phrases or even expressions not in everyday use, invented or created by an author to explain an idea) as used originally
Rephrasing by making slight adjustments
Paraphrasing in a way which may deceive the reader as to the source.
Plagiarism in whatever form it takes is form of academic misconduct.
Collusion:
If students submit work for assessment that is falsely presented as the student’s own work but was jointly written with somebody else; this is a form of academic misconduct.

Duplication/Self-Plagiarism:
The inclusion in assessments of a significant amount of identical or substantially similar material to that already submitted for assessment by the student and graded for the same course or any other course or module at this University or elsewhere is classed as self-plagiarism. It does not include a resubmission of the same piece of work allowed by the examiners in an improved or revised form for reassessment purposes. Self-plagiarism is a form of academic misconduct.

Further clarification of the above can be found in CCCU’s Academic Misconduct documents below
CCCU Student Academic Misconduct Procedures can be found below: Please click the link to Open.
https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Misconduct-Procedures-staff-students.pdf
CCCU Student Academic Integrity Policy can be found below: Please click the link to Open.
https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Integrity-Policy.pdf