eassay
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
Individual Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester: T2, 2020
Unit Code: HC1052
Assessment Type: Individual Assessment
Assessment Title: Individual Essay (2000 words excluding references)
Learning Objectives: Applying concepts such as employee engagement, organisational
citizenship, dysfunctional behaviours, and managing for effectiveness.
Weight: 20 marks
Word Limit: 2000 words
Due date: Week 5 (Friday 21 August, 2020, 11:59 pm)
Submission Guidelines
All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
The assignment must be typed in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2
cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate headings/sub-headings and
page numbers.
A minimum of six references must be cited in the text of the essay and listed
appropriately at the end of the paper in a reference list in Harvard referencing style.
2
Essay Topic/Scenario
Imagine that you are a manager in a local restaurant. There are many restaurants in town,
making it a competitive business. You recognise that providing high quality, friendly service
and having actively engaged employees is going to make the difference between your
restaurants success and failure. Your management team decides to first address
organisational citizenship and employee engagement as drivers of high-quality customer
service.
Task Requirements
First, think about what your restaurant can do to enhance the engagement and citizenship
behaviours of your employees. Your management team next decides that it will be important
to minimise dysfunctional employee behaviours if the restaurant is to succeed. Second,
identify some dysfunctional behaviours that should be minimised. Third, think about what
your restaurant can do to minimise the occurrence of these destructive behaviours. Fourth,
identify your top three suggestions/recommendations for the restaurant to succeed.
Provide Evidence to Support your Responses
So far, you have written your responses about what you have read and learnt. The next step is
to find a minimum of six peer-reviewed academic articles from Google Scholar and
ProQuest research database which provide evidence/support the main ideas you have
determined from your reading.
Note: Please note that a 0 mark will be awarded to this assessment if the references
provided are not peer-reviewed academic articles. If youre in doubt about what is a peer-
3
reviewed academic article please ask your tutor in the interactive tutorial sessions or the unit
coordinator in the drop-in sessions.
Write your Response/Comprehension
Write an introduction (describe the purpose of the essay and the main points you will
be covering).
Compose 3-4 body paragraphs (minimum 300 words each).
Write a conclusion.
The document must be typed in MS Word using an appropriate font (e.g. Times New
Roman, Helvetica, Cambria or Arial (size 12 pt, 1.5 line spacing and left aligned).
What goes in an introduction?
This paragraph introduces the purpose of your analytical essay. Within the introductory
paragraph, you will need to introduce the topic of your essay and highlight the key topics you
will address in subsequent paragraphs of this essay.
How do I write body paragraphs?
Each paragraph has one main point or topic. A good paragraph needs a clear topic sentence to
state the purpose of this paragraph. Then you will write 3-4 statements elaborating on that
point using citations (in-text references) to attribute ideas to journal articles you read. Your
analysis should demonstrate critical thinking based on research, not just your opinion.
Please paraphrase your ideas from journal articles rather than using quotations.
What goes in a conclusion?
The conclusion is not a restatement of the introduction. Instead, it must briefly summarise the
key points in the body paragraphs and leave the reader with a clear message(s).
4
What about references?
Your list of references do not count towards word limit, but in-text citations do. The
referencing format for both the in-text referencing and reference list is Harvard style. Please
see the Harvard referencing style and ProQuest login in the additional resources folder in
Blackboard.
Marking Criteria
Marking Criteria Weighting
Embark + Clarity 4
Find + Generate 3
Evaluate + Reflect 3
Organise + Manage 3
Communicate + Apply 4
Total Weight 20%
5
Marking Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts.
Embark + Clarity
(Addresses the task
requirements)
3.5-4 Pts.
HD
Exceptionally clear
understanding and
ability to address all
task requirements and
with clear purpose.
3 Pts.
D
Strong grasp of
understanding and ability
to address all task
requirements.
2.5 Pts.
CR
Competent understanding
and ability to address all
task requirements.
2 Pts.
PA
Some understanding of the
task evident but some
requirements are missing.
0-1.9 Pts.
NN
Lack of understanding of the task requirements
and an inability to offer structured directions
from researching.
4
Find + Generate
(Evidence of research +
Harvard referencing format)
3 Pts.
HD
Uses refined academic
research skills to
locate current, credible,
accurate and
authoritative
data/information. Uses
Harvard referencing
style and in-text
citations with no errors.
2.5 Pts
D
Uses academic research
skills to locate current,
credible and authoritative
data/information. Uses
Harvard referencing style
and in-text citations with
minimal errors.
2 Pts.
CR
Uses academic research
skills to locate
current and credible
data/information.
Uses Harvard referencing
style and in-text citations,
with some consistent
errors.
1.5 Pts.
PA
Uses general academic
research skills to
locate current
data/information.
Inconsistently applies
Harvard referencing style.
In-text citations and
reference list show
multiple errors.
0-1.4 Pts.
NN
Does not locate and report data/information
from a number of sources across a specified
range. The articles sourced do not meet the
academic standard required or are not cited or
do not have a clear
application to the task.
3
Evaluate + Reflect
(Articles meet task criteria, is
current, relevant, accurate and
peer-reviewed)
3 Pts.
HD
Articles selected
relate strongly to the
purpose of the task,
and meet the
academic standard
required. Strongly
support reflection on
the essay topic.
2.5 Pts.
D
Articles selected relate to
the purpose of the task,
and meet the academic
standard required.
Support reflection on the
essay topic.
2 Pts
CR
Articles selected generally
relate to the purpose of the
task and meet the
academic standard
required. Support some
reflection on the essay
topic.
1.5 Pts.
PA
Articles selected
generally relate to the
purpose of the task. The
articles may not fully
meet the academic
standard required.
Minimal reflection on the
essay topic.
0-1.4 Pts.
NN
Student has not made connections to the essay
topic. Unable to demonstrate satisfactory
original reflection on the essay topic.
3
Organise + Manage
(Logical structure of
information)
3 Pts.
HD
Main ideas clearly
outlined. Discussion and
analysis organised
logically. Cohesive
structure- consistently
encourages reader
engagement with the
2.5 Pts.
D
Main ideas clearly
outlined. Discussion and
analysis organised
logically. Cohesive
structure – supports
reader engagement
with the content.
2 Pts.
CR
Main ideas clearly
outlined. Information
organised mostly
logically. Generally
cohesive structure aids
reader understanding of
ideas.
1.5 Pts.
PA
Main ideas outlined but
require more
description or explanation.
Some logical
order in the structure but
there is limited
linking between ideas and
0-1.4 Pts.
NN
Main ideas not clearly defined. Information
randomly presented. No sense of cohesion
between ideas. Inappropriate structure and
organisation and information not always
coherent nor integrated.
3
6
content. information
presented.
Analyse + Synthesise
(Critical analysis and synthesis
of ideas to produce
understanding)
3 Pts.
HD
Analysis, critical
personal reflection and
evaluation are fully
integrated effectively to
a high standard of
performance.
2.5 Pts.
D
Analysis and personal
reflection are quite well
integrated.
2 Pts.
CR
Some analysis and
attempts at personal
reflection. Attempts to
synthesise ideas to
discuss/analyse the essay
topic.
1.5 Pts.
PA
Minimal analysis and
personal reflection.
Some attempts to
discuss/analyse the essay
topic. Limited integration
or synthesis
to show understanding of
the essay topic.
0-1.4 Pts.
NN
Alignment of the key idea with the essay topic
and main ideas not outlined clearly. Limited
understanding of the essay topic.
3
Communicate + Apply 3.5-4 Pts.
HD
Uses discipline specific
language to
demonstrate
understanding from an
academic/professional
and personal
perspective. Writing is
fluent and uses
appropriate
paragraph/sentence
structures.
3 Pts.
D
Includes discipline specific
language. Generally
demonstrates
understanding from an
academic/professional and
personal perspective. Some
interpretation and
application of new
knowledge to similar
contexts. Writing is
generally fluent and uses
mostly appropriate
paragraph/sentence
structures.
2.5 Pts.
CR
Some discipline specific
language. Attempts to
demonstrate
understanding from both
academic/professional and
personal perspectives.
Attempted interpretation
and application of new
knowledge. Writing is
generally understandable
and uses mostly
appropriate
paragraph/sentence
structures.
2 Pts.
PA
Limited vocabulary with
little use of discipline
specific language.
Demonstrates
understanding from one
perspective. Minimal
interpretation or
application of new
knowledge. Errors are
frequent, often making
understanding difficult.
0-1.9 Pts.
NN
Mostly general vocabulary with an inability to
use discipline-specific and academic language.
Unable to act as an independent critical
thinker. Unsatisfactory attempt to discuss the
essay topic. Inability to demonstrate the
originality of the solution.
4
7
Academic Integrity
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic Integrity is integral to maintaining academic quality and the
reputation of Holmes graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of
Academic Integrity breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please consult your lecturer or
tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources can also be found through the Study Sills link on Blackboard.
Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit
involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.
Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches
Plagiarism Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When
a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is
known as self-plagiarism.
Collusion Working with one or more other individuals to complete an
assignment, in a way that is not authorised.
Copying Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or
without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable
precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied,
this may also be considered an offence.
Impersonation Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as
oneself, in an in-person examination.
Contract cheating Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task,
generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment.
8
Data fabrication and
falsification
Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false
conclusions, including manipulating images.
Source: INQAAHE, 2020
