Essay

The assessed coursework for the module will be a 3000 word essay.

Topic:

Using a case study of your choice (Mega Event), critically evaluate the strategies that potential candidate cities should consider to ensure a positive legacy.

Essay Marking Scheme

70+

This mark will be awarded for answers that include an excellent analysis of issues and problems encountered by previous host nations. An excellent range of sources and data have been included to support arguments and the analysis is relevant and appropriate.  An excellent understanding of the concept of key issues involved in staging mega-events, including the need for strategic planning and a legacy plan has been included and appropriate examples from previous host nations has been assessed. The concept of legacy planning has been clearly lined to leverage and the need for strategic planning. The answer does not waste time discussing operational issues. The essay conforms to conventional essay writing standards and is fully supported by a wide range of relevant and appropriate sources.

60-69

This mark will be awarded to answers that include a good knowledge of the problems and issues encountered by previous host nations. The answer must contain data from previous case studies and this data must support the analysis. A good knowledge of the concept of legacy planning and its link with strategy to leverage legacy must be included. The answer must evaluate rather than describe and does not focus on operational issues. The essay must conform to standard essay writing techniques and be supported by a wide range of appropriate and relevant sources.

50- 59

This mark will be awarded to answers that tend to describe rather that analyse the problems and issues of previous host nations. Data from previous case studies must be included in the answer.  The answer must demonstrate a sound knowledge of the concept of legacy planning and show how a strategy for the Olympics might achieve this. The essay must comply with conventional essay writing techniques and be supported throughout by appropriate and relevant references.

40-49

This mark will be awarded to answers that include limited data and analysis from previous case studies.  The concept of legacy planning has not been fully explored in the answer and there is limited understanding of the extent to which a strategy for the  leveraging the Olympics will meet the hosts objectives  The answer is weak in supporting references and is poorly constructed with little logical flow.

30- 39

This is a referred grade and indicates that the essay has not achieved the required standard.  There are many reasons why this might be the case. These include: the student has not read or understood the instructions. The essay does not deal with the relevant subject matter. The essay is lacking in references and sources and uses mainly websites rather than academic sources. The essay has been submitted past the deadline.

The University regards any action by a student that may result in an unfair academic advantage as a serious offence.  It is your responsibility to ensure at all times that the assessments you complete are entirely your own work and that you have used the relevant referencing technique correctly and in full.  The full set of regulations which govern Academic Integrity can be found under Section 4, Assessment         Regulations 3 and 4 .                                   http://www2.hud.ac.uk/registry/students_handbook.php

Further information on academic integrity, including an overview of the support available for referencing, can be found within your course handbook; it is important that you familiarise yourself with this information.

GENERAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – UNDERGRADUATE                             

The criteria below are not intended to be either exhaustive or definitive and are to be taken as guidelines rather than imposing absolute standards. In instances where these guidelines are not applicable, for example in the case of presentations or group work, the particular assessment criteria to be used should be clearly specified.

Outstanding: 90 – 100%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      a mastery of complex knowledge and ideas

·      originality and insight derived from a mature depth of understanding of material that goes well beyond that provided in the module

·      creative synthesis arising from critical analysis and evaluation of relevant information

·      presentation that is clear, coherent and error free

Excellent: 80 – 89%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      logical, coherent and scholarly discussion and application of theory

·      insight derived from a thorough depth of understanding of module and additional material

·      synthesis arising from critical analysis and evaluation of relevant information

·      presentation that is clear, consistent and error free

Very good: 70 – 79%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      accomplished discussion and application of theory

·      clear ability to compare and contrast material from a wide variety of relevant sources

·      some synthesis based on critical analysis

·      well-structured, clear and coherent presentation, although there may be a few minor errors

Good: 60 – 69%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      good use of module material

·      ability to compare and contrast material from a variety of relevant sources

·      analytical ability underpinning logical argument

·      well-structured, clear and consistent presentation, although there may be a few errors

Fair: 50 – 59%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      generally sound use of some of the module material

·      reasonable and coherent description of theory

·      limited analysis and evaluation

·      no major errors

Adequate: 40 – 49%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      limited use of module material

·      a basic level of understanding

·      a simply descriptive approach

·      some errors and omissions

Unsatisfactory: 30 – 39%

Work at this level will demonstrate

·      an incomplete answer

·      little depth of understanding

·      some serious errors and omissions

·      a potentially recoverable piece of work

Poor: 0 – 29%

Work at this level

·      does not address the task set

·      requires a complete re-write

Assessment deadlines

It is important that you keep a copy of all of the work you submit for assessment.  You are strongly advised to use the electronic storage system provided by the University, using the allocated space on the ‘K’ drive.

It is School policy that all assessed work must be submitted electronically via Turnitin, by 23:59 on the published date of submission.  No hard copies should be submitted unless this is identified as a requirement in the Assessment Brief.  Where hard copies are required, please ensure the work submitted is stapled in the top left hand corner, not submitted in folders or ring binders and your student ID number and name are clearly visible on the assessment.

If you are not able to submit by the deadline, you must inform your Course Leader.  Depending on the circumstances, you may need to ask for an extension or submit an extenuating circumstances form – see Section 5.4 below.

Assessed work which is submitted late but within five working days of the agreed submission date will be accepted and the maximum mark available for that piece of assessment will be 40%.  This does not apply to the submission of assessed work relating to Tutor Reassessment, referral or deferral requirements but does apply to previously agreed extended or renegotiated deadlines.  Work submitted later than this without an approved extension will receive a mark of 0%.

Please note that loss of data or printing error are not deemed to be acceptable reasons for the late submission of work.

It is important that the following regulations are adhered to regarding assessment word limits as penalties do apply if limits are exceeded. In essence, you will only be awarded a grade on the content of your assessment up to the word limit and anything past that will be discounted.

1. The word limit is as set out in the assessment task and is not subject to variation.
2. The limit excludes the bibliography or reference list, footnotes, appendices and details of the assessment task.
3. The mark to be awarded will therefore be that which applies at this word limit.