We write, we don’t plagiarise! Every answer is different no matter how many orders we get for the same assignment. Your answer will be 100% plagiarism-free, custom written, unique and different from every other student.
I agree to receive phone calls from you at night in case of emergency
Please share your assignment brief and supporting material (if any) via email here at: [email protected] after completing this order process.
Assessment 2
Disruption & Engagement
Due: Week 8
Weighting: 30%
Type: Case Study Review / Visual & Written Presentation)
Learning Outcomes:
Description:
Research and analyse a case study of disruption with global implications that was unsuccessful in achieving its intended objective. Reflect and write a critical analysis to identify why the disruption was unsuccessful, the impact it did or did not make, including level of engagement, social, cultural, ethical, environmental & sustainability considerations with reference to theory (include citations using Harvard referencing). Describe how you would have approached it differently to deliver the desired outcome. In addition, prepare a self-reflective statement of the personal position on the project process and outcomes. Present as a visual presentation (min. 20 slides) and written presentation (2,000 words).
Details:
Students must cite at least 3 external sources and refer to these using Harvard referencing (in text citations and reference list). Also include a full bibliography.
Upload final essay as a PDF file (Word converted to PDF) and a second PDF file (PowerPoint converted to PDF) of the visual presentation to Moodle for marking.
Marking Criteria & Rubrics:
Criterion 1:
Depth of research and analysis – 40%
Fail:
Incomplete research and analysis
Pass:
Adequate but basic research and analysis
Credit:
Competent research and analysis
Distinction:
Compressive and detailed research and analysis
Criterion 2:
Critical evaluation of influences and impact – 20%
Incomplete critical evaluation
Adequate but basic critical evaluation
Competent critical evaluation
Compressive and detailed critical evaluation
High Distinction
Outstanding critical evaluation
Criterion 3:
Personal refection – 20%
Incomplete personal reflection
Adequate but basic personal reflection
Competent personal reflection
Compressive and detailed personal reflection
Outstanding and insightful personal reflection
Criterion 4:
Quality of presentation (incl. Referencing) – 20%
Incomplete presentation, no references
Adequate but basic presentation, some references
Competent presentation with references
Compressive and detailed presentation, accurate references
Outstanding presentation, includes additional references
Plagiarism Report
Formatting
Title page
Bibliography
Outline
Limitless Amendments
Get all these features for د.إ195.00 FREE
Check Out Our Original Reviews
