Retail Theory and Practice - Essay Prowess

Retail Theory and Practice

  

Summative Assessment Brief

Academic year and term: Semester 2 2017-18 Sem A Oct 2018
Module title: Retail Theory and Practice
Module code: 
Module Convener: 
Learning outcomes assessed within this piece of work as agreed at the programme level meeting   Knowledge outcome – You will be able to develop your understanding of contemporary developments in retail theory and practice and how these contribute to organisational success   Intellectual /transferrable skill – You will be able to consider a complex issue in retail theory and practice and propose feasible alternative options for consideration.     
Type of assessment:                Formative Assessment – Feedback provided on one page draft plan. (500 words). Summative Assessment – Individual assignment: A 2500 words report analysing a specific retail sector and how a large retailer might respond to the issues facing the sector in general and the retailer. (100%)  
Assessment deadline: 19th Dec 2018

Instructions for Summative Assessment

Your assessment for this module takes the form of a 2500 words individual report:

Prepare a report for a large fashion clothing retailer, trading in the UK that:

a) Identifies key relevant changes in the UK fashion clothing market and

b) Suggests and discusses strategies and tactics that could be used by the retailer to respond to the major changes occurring in the fashion clothing market.

The word limit for this assessment is 2,500 words (+/- 10%)

PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR REPORT BY 14.00:   19th Dec 2018

How will we support you with your assessment?

  • There will be an assessment briefing in Week 2
  • A formative assessment of 500 words consisting of report plan will allow you the opportunity to show your work to date on your assignment and obtain formative feedback from your tutors.
  • You will receive formative feedback in week 6. This will take the form of written feedback on the formative report plan.
  • Links to the assessment throughout your seminars.
  • There will be an opportunity to review and reflect upon work from previous cohorts.

How will your work be assessed?

Your work will be assessed by a subject expert who will use the marking grid provided in this assessment brief.  When you access your marked work it is important that you reflect on the feedback so that you can use it to improve future assignments.

Referencing

You MUST use the Harvard System.  The Harvard system is very easy to use once you become familiar with it.

Assignment submissions

The Business School requires a digital version of all assignment submissions.  These must be submitted via Turnitin on the module’s Moodle site.  They must be submitted as a Word file (not as a pdf) and must not include scanned in text or text boxes.  They must be submitted by 2pm on the given date.  For further general details on coursework preparation refer to the online information via StudentZone http://studentzone.roehampton.ac.uk/howtostudy/index.html

Mitigating circumstances/what to do if you cannot submit a piece of work or attend your presentation

The University Mitigating Circumstances Policy can be found on the University website –  Mitigating  Circumstances Policy

Marking and feedback process

Between you handing in your work and then receiving your feedback and marks within 20 days, there are a number of quality assurance processes that we go through to ensure that students receive marks which reflects their work. A brief summary is provided below.

  • Step One – The module and marking team meet to agree standards, expectations and how feedback will be provided.
  • Step Two – A subject expert will mark your work using the criteria provided in the assessment brief.
  • Step Three – A moderation meeting takes place where all members of the teaching and marking team will review the marking of others to confirm whether they agree with the mark and feedback
  • Step Four – Work at Levels 5 and 6 then goes to an external examiner who will review a sample of work to confirm that the marking between different staff is consistent and fair
  • Stop Five – Your mark and feedback is processed by the Office and made available to you.


  • Grading Criteria
  100 Outstanding 80-89 Excellent 70-79 Very Good 60-69 Good 50-59 Satisfactory 40-49 Adequate 30-39 Marginal Fail 20-29 Fail 0 Not Done
1. Content, breadth and relevance of research 35% Exemplary in all aspects. Excellent… Exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate  reading and research. Impressive choice and range of appropriate content Very good … Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Evidence of appropriate reading.  Covers all relevant points & issues. Good… Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Covers most relevant points & issues. Few  errors / omissions in content. Satisfactory… Grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented. Knowledge & understanding is demonstrated.  Minor errors / omissions in content Incomplete content / level of knowledge of the topic.  Addresses part of the task. Some errors / omissions in content. May benefit from further research Some basic knowledge of topic evident.  Limited content. Limited/ dated range of sources   Very Weak… Limited content / knowledge. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question. limited/ dated range of sources   Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.  
2. Level of analysis/application  of theory   35%   Exemplary in all aspects Excellent…  Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Highly developed/ focused work Very good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection clearly developing points in the appropriate way with thorough consideration of alternatives. Good…  Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection & a few ideas/points could benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison.  Satisfactory… Level of discussion/analysis but more ideas/points could be addressed /developed further Basic evidence of analysis/ or reflection but some points superficially made so needs further development. Relevant issues poorly identified, little use of theory Very poor analysis. Little or no use of theory Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.    
3. Conclusion/ Discussion/ policy recommendations 20%   Exemplary in all aspects Excellent… Business/policy insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature into work.   Very good … Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Evidence of appropriate reading. Covers all relevant points & issues. Good… Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations. Satisfactory… Grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented. Knowledge & understanding is demonstrated.  Minor errors / omissions in content Limited business/policy insight & application. Limited integration with theory/ data.    Displays some weak evidence of business/policy application & insight Work needs to show better links between practical application & theory. Little  evidence of business/policy application & insight Work needs to show better links between practical application & theory. Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.  
4. Presentation-Clarity, structure, grammar, correct referencing   10%   Exemplary in all aspects Excellent presentation throughout Excellent spelling and grammar   Faultless referencing throughout the assignment Very good presentation throughout High standard of spelling & grammar   Very good referencing throughout the assignment Good presentation throughout Good standard of  spelling & grammar   Minor errors in the referencing of others Satisfactory presentation throughout Few errors in spelling & grammar   Few errors in the referencing  of others Adequate presentation & formatting throughout Few spelling & grammatical errors Most references are presented appropriately in the main text List of references is correct Inadequate presentation & formatting throughout A number of spelling and grammatical inaccuracies. Failure to cite all references in the main text. Incomplete reference list Poor presentation & formatting in most areas Many spelling & grammatical errors Poor structure Inconsistent use of referencing in the main text Incorrect reference list Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.