Faculty of Social Sciences – Assessment Brief for Students
|Module code and title||5IB004: Economics of Managerial Decision Making|
|Submission date||July 2020|
|Submission method||Electronic Submission via CANVAS|
|Assessment limits||See individual task|
|Assessment brief (if appropriate, please refer to module assessment briefing document)|
|The Portfolio consists of TWO TASKS, which are divided as follows: TASK ONE – A CASE STUDY THAT IS WEIGHTED AT 50% OF THE OVERALL GRADE FOR THE PORTFOLIO Read the following fictional scenario and answer the questions shown below. Joy Hospital Ltd. is the UK’s largest private healthcare provider, commanding 24% of the market share with the remaining 76% shared between 5 other companies. An independent consumer report found that the UK private healthcare industry is ripe for collusion. The product is undifferentiated (identical), and the number of sellers is small. Pricing in the market is transparent, making it easy for a market leader to raise prices, and for other operators to take the hint and follow suit. The costs of telecommunication networks do not vary that much. As a result, says the report, sellers’ pricing structures tend to run in parallel, at ‘high and rigid’ levels. Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Project W Project X Payback 3.8 years 2.8 years Internal Rate of Return 14% 16% Net present value 880000 610000 Explain, through an examination of each of the investment appraisal techniques above, which product would be the most preferable to Joy Hospital Ltd. (5 marks) Question 5 (100 Marks Total) Note DO NOT write back the case study or the questions in your answers; simply put the question number and the answer. Assessment criteria Weight (%) 100 There will be the opportunity to discuss your progress with the tasks during the workshop sessions during the course of the module. The portfolio should be submitted as a single document. There is no need for an overall introduction or an overall conclusion. You should include a cover sheet that includes the module code, the title of the module and your student number. A bibliography must be provided for each of the tasks. The electronic version of the portfolio must be submitted in MSWord format. If you do not provide a copy by the deadline it will mean that you have failed to comply with the submission requirements and you will FAIL the assignment. Your feedback for the assignment will be provided face to face by booking an appointment after the grades have been released. TASK TWO – AN ESSAY THAT IS WEIGHTED AT 50% OF THE OVERALL GRADE FOR THE PORTFOLIO You are required to write an essay that addresses the following topic: The predictions for the UK Economy for the fourth quarter of 2020 are as follows: The management of Joy Hospital Ltd has asked you to evaluate the effects of the predicted changes in the UK economy outlined above on the performance of the company. Specifically, you should write an essay to address the effects of the findings of the independent report on the performance of Joy Hospital Ltd. Performance should include, but is not limited to, the effects on price, cost, demand, investment opportunities, profits etc. Your report should also include recommendations to Joy Hospital on how to remain competitive even in good economic times. (100 Marks) Word Limit: 1800 words maximum. Please note that a penalty will be incurred for exceeding the word limit. Assessment criteria Weight (%) 40 40 NOTE: your essay must include at least 5 academic (e.g. referred journal articles or text books) references. 20|
|Assessment Criteria (The actual assessment components for this assignment)|
|Criteria||Weighting (If applicable)|
|The module Learning Outcomes tested by this assessment task are indicated on the next page. The precise criteria against which your work will be marked are tailored to each of the two tasks and are detailed on the separate task sheets available on the module CANVAS page|
|Pass mark||Undergraduate 40%|
|Performance descriptors in use;|
|Return of assessments (Instructions for return / collection of assessments)||Grades will be available within 20 working days of the submission date.|
|This assessment is testing Module Learning outcomes||Tick if tested here|
|LO1||Discuss a range of theoretical perspectives regarding the economics of managerial decision-making||ü|
|LO2||Assess the influence of market structure on organisational behaviour and performance||ü|
Additional information for students
The University’s Learning Information Services have produced a series of guides covering a range of topics to support your studies, and develop your academic skills including a guide to academic referencing http://www.wlv.ac.uk/lib/skills_for_learning/study_guides.aspx
Your module guide and course handbook contain additional and important information regarding;
Whilst many modules require referencing in accordance with the Harvard Referencing convention, some modules – for example those within the School of Law – require Oxford Referencing. Please familiarise yourself with the requirements of your module.
* Further information regarding these and other policies can be accessed through your student portal on wlv.ac.uk.
Always keep a copy of your work and a file of working papers
The requirement to keep a file of working papers is important. There may be circumstances where it is difficult to arrive at a mark for your work. If this is the case, you may be asked to submit your file and possibly meet with your tutor to answer questions on your submission.
When you submit your work you will be required to sign an important declaration confirming that:
The following information is important when:
Module Learning Outcomes
Module Learning Outcomes are specific to this module, and are set when the module was validated.
The module Learning Outcomes tested by this assignment, and precise criteria against which your work will be marked are outlined in your assessment brief.
Performance descriptors indicate how marks will be arrived at against each of the assessment criteria. The descriptors indicate the likely characteristics of work that is marked within the percentage bands indicated.
To help you further:
FoSS Generic Assessment Performance Descriptors
Based on – University Performance Descriptors (updated September 2015)
Note that these are generic descriptors that apply mainly, though not exclusively, to written academic work. The relevant performance descriptors for the appropriate level (as below) should appear in the module guide.
Any further module-specific assessment criteria, such as number of words, should be clearly stated in the assignment brief.
The pass rate at levels 3 -6 = 40%
|Level 3||Level 4||Level 5||Level 6 (Graduate level)|
|90-100%||Very detailed answers to all parts of the question / task. Extremely clearly structured and focused, demonstrating overall coherence and in- depth understanding. Clear evidence of a range of independently sourced material well applied in all contexts. No obvious errors in grammar as appropriate.||Focused and comprehensive engagement with the question, showing evidence of in-depth understanding of the issues. Extremely clearly structured and demonstrating a coherent argument throughout. Evidence of wide, independent reading. No obvious errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Exceptionally detailed and original response to the assignment, with critical use of independently sourced contextual material. Outstanding demonstration of linked understanding of relevant theory, concepts and models. Extremely well structured with high level of analysis. No obvious errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Exceptional level of analysis, showing deep critical engagement with a comprehensive range of contextual material. Demonstration of independent thought resulting in highly original or creative responses to the assignment. Provision of clear evidence of understanding of current scholarship and research based on an extensive range of relevant sources. Extreme clarity of structure demonstrating complete focus of argument. No obvious errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.|
|80-89%||Detailed answers to all parts of the question / task. Very clear, logical structure and focus, demonstrating overall coherence. Clear evidence of independently sourced material appropriately applied. Very few errors in grammar as appropriate.||Detailed response to all relevant parts of the question with evidence of clear understanding of the issues. Well structured with evidence of independent reading supporting the argument. Very few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Very full, independent response to the assignment with totally relevant material which is well beyond any module input, demonstrating independent study. Excellent understanding and application of relevant theory, concepts and models. Very clear logical structure. Very few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Excellent links between relevant ideas, theories and practice. Evidence of clearly independent scholarship and the ability to engage critically and analytically with a wide range of contextually relevant resource material. Demonstration of original insights, supported by extremely well structured overall argument. Very few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.|
|70-79%||Full answers to all the parts of the question / task. Clear structure and focus. Evidence of material not covered in taught context and appropriately applied to given context. Few errors in grammar as appropriate.||Identification and very good understanding of issues in the assessment. Full answers to all questions/task. Very clear argument with relevant examples used to illustrate response. Clear evidence of reading outside the module list. Few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Full response to the assignment with all content relevant and focused. Very good understanding of relevant theory, concepts and models. Application of appropriate theory to examples/practice, demonstrating a rigorous approach to a variety of ideas, contexts and frameworks. Few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Very good links between a range of different ideas and theories. Places issues in a wider context. Evidence of clear understanding of a range of relevant theories and application of these appropriately. Independent ideas, well argued and supported. Few errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.|
|60-69%||All significant content accurate. All main points of question / task covered. Identifiable structure. Some evidence of material not directly covered in taught input. Some small repeated errors in grammar as appropriate||Goodunderstanding of the issues. Engages directly with the question. Clear argument with good examples used to support it. All main points and important issues of the question/task covered. Some evidence of reading outside the module list Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate||Answers most if not all detailed aspects of the question. Content mainly relevant and accurate. Good knowledge and understanding of relevant theory and concepts and application of theoretical models. Evidence of a developing appreciation of contextual issues. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate||Clear links between theory and practice. Good coverage of assignment issues. Full understanding of core issues. Evidenced level of understanding of appropriate theory and concepts. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate|
|50-59%||Content generally accurate and relevant to the question / task. Reasonable breadth of taught material used. Evidence of structure.||Generally sound understanding of basic concepts. Content relevant to the question/task. Competently deals with main issues. Reading based on main texts or materials, but not always fully utilised in supporting arguments. Some repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Main issues addressed and solid attempt to answer question. Some relevant content applied. Sound knowledge and understanding of relevant theory and concepts and identification of main issues Some repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.||Identifies main issues and relevant theory. Coverage of most of assignment issues. Competent application of relevant theory and states obvious links to practice. Some repeated errors in referencing or grammar or syntax as appropriate.|
|40-49% 40% Pass mark||Satisfactory evidence of understanding of basic concepts/issues and demonstration that the learning outcomes have been met. Limited use of the breadth of taught content. Some attempt at structure.||Satisfactory evidence of understanding of basic concepts/issues and demonstration that the learning outcomes have been met. Content broadly relevant but with limited or little application of theory. Almost totally descriptive.||Satisfactory attempt to address question/issues with some content relevant to assignment topic. Demonstration that the learning outcomes have been met. Material engages with relevant module materials, but largely repeats taught input and lacks development or personal interpretation. Some general understanding of topic||Demonstration that the learning outcomes have been met. Makes few links between theory and practice. Answers question in a very basic way. Describes relevant theory accurately, and some relevant ideas offered. Limited coherence of structure.|
|30-39% Compensatable Fail||Some learning outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Repetition of taught content with minimal attempt to focus on the given question or issue. Little evidence of structure. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learning outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission.||Some learning outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Superficial treatment of issues. Some is relevant to topic set. Material merely repeats taught input. Lacks understanding of basic theory or concepts. Possible use of extensive quoted passages. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learning outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission.||Some learning outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Questions not answered fully. Content not wholly relevant. Little or no evidence of understanding of relevant theory. Very repetitive of taught input – no development or application. The use of extensive quoted passages evident. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learning outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission.||Some learning outcomes and / or assessment criteria not met. Inadequate content with issues not addressed; insufficient evidence of understanding of relevant theory and concepts and only partial understanding shown. Very limited application of theory. Use of extensive quoted passages is evident. Evidence of sufficient grasp of learning outcomes to suggest that the student will be able to retrieve the module on resubmission.|
|20-29% Fail||No learning outcomes fully met. Little evidence of attempts to engage with module materials.||No learning outcomes fully met. Little evidence of attempts to engage with module materials.||No learning outcomes fully met. Little attempt to engage with the module materials or ideas.||No learning outcomes fully met. No demonstration of adequate knowledge or understanding of key concepts or theories. There is no recognition of the complexity of the subject.|
|10-19% Fail||Little attempt to engage with assignment brief and has not met learning outcomes. Inadequate demonstration of knowledge or understanding of key concepts, theories or practice.||Little attempt to engage with assignment brief and has not met learning outcomes. Inadequate demonstration of knowledge or understanding of key concepts, theories or practice.||Little attempt to engage with assignment brief and has not met learning outcomes. Inadequate demonstration of knowledge or understanding of key concepts, theories or practice.|
|0-9% Fail||No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes||No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes||No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes||No real attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes.|