Faculty of Business and Law

 Assignment Brief

Module Title

Perspectives on Creative Leadership

Assignment Number

One

Module Code

ENTE 3522

Assignment Title

Individual Reflective Essay

Module Leader

Dr Huriye Yeroz

 

 

Assignment Weighting

50%

 

 

 

 

Assignment Release
Date:

03 Oct 2023

 

 

Submission Date/Time:

Monday, 5th of February 2024 (12.00-noon)

 

 

 

CLICK HERE TO GET THIS ANSWER (ORIGINAL)

Assessment
Information – What you need to do

 

This individual assignment will give you a chance
to reflect upon various aspects of leadership in a structured and focused way.
The essay will be 2000 words. You are expected to be creative in this
assignment and use experiential data to reflect upon certain aspects of
leadership discussed throughout lectures, seminars and suggested readings.
Source of experiential data may come from:

1) Your own experience of a group work during the
previous years. The context of a group work can be (but not limited to):

a) Educational settings such as a group project that
was undertaken within a module, or a program at the University, high school
or trainings

b) An organized group work out of the University,
e.g., a civic project, a business project, family project, charity work,
community/religious work, or else.

 

2) Collecting data:

a) In the form of interviews you conduct with
leaders

b) Shadow a leader or leaders and use these
ethnographic observations as your data source.

c) Reading a novel or set of books (whatever
kinds) on certain leaders and/or certain aspects of leadership.

d) Films or documentaries about certain leaders
and/or certain aspects of leadership.

e) Magazines, news clips or columns about certain
leaders and/or certain aspects of leadership.

f) Social media accounts of leaders such as Instagram
accounts.

g) You can also blend those sources listed above by
citing your references clearly.

 

In structuring your writing, you can draw on
reflective writing models. We have combined two frameworks to help you with
this task: 1) Gibbs reflective cycle (1988) and 2) Ash, Clayton, & Moses
(2009) Learning through Critical Reflection, which are adopted to be used in
an essay format.

The suggested structure, which you can find in the
assessment details section, would help you to structure your approach towards
reflective writing & practice, which is helpful to think of reflection in
a cyclical as well as categorical manner.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CLICK HERE TO GET THIS ANSWER (ORIGINAL)

Criteria for Assessment – How you will be marked

 

 

The assessment is structured around major elements
listed below:

 

Introduction (10 %): Introduction should state
practical/managerial and personal relevance as well as theoretical
motivation/justification.

Structure (20 %): 
Structure should involve the language, which is clear and expressive.
The reader should be able to create a mental picture of the experiential
situation described. Abstract concepts are explained accurately. Explanation
of concepts makes sense to an uninformed reader.

Relevance (10 %): This part measures to what
extent the learning experience reflected upon is relevant and meaningful to
student and/or assignment brief & learning goals.

Analysis (20 %): The analysis captures to what
extent the reflection moves beyond simple description of the experience to an
analysis of how the experience contributed to student understanding of self,
others, and leadership frameworks/concepts.

Interconnection (10 %): This part captures to
what extent the reflection makes creative and rigorous connections between
the experience and material from other research, experience, and/or personal
goals.

Critical Art (20 %): The reflection demonstrates the
ability of the student to question their own biases, stereotypes,
preconceptions, and/or assumptions and contextual and/or theoretical
assumptions or biases, etc., which define new modes of thinking as a result.

Format, Style, Referencing (10 %): Measuring
presentation throughout in terms of word count, grammar/spelling, proper use
of figures, tables and/or appendices and accurate referencing (DMU Harvard
Style)

 

Further, we developed the rubrics that are
tailored around your leadership development levels. The four levels will help
you to identify and position your reflective leadership development and show
areas to improve accordingly. According to your total score you may call
yourself as one of the following;

Non-Reflective Leader: 0-25%

Reflective Novice: 26% -%50

Aware Leader: %51-75%

Reflective Leader: 76%-100%

 

General Assessment Criteria

 

The general assessment will be structured around;

 

The thickness/richness of your experiential data
and description

Your skilful application of the experiential data
to examine theoretical points/insights

That will lead to an articulate and reflexive
argument(s) that will develop academic theory and practice of leadership

 

 

 

 

 

Assessment Details

 

•       
Title: Find a brief and catchy
title that will reflect the main message and/or context of your reflective
essay

•       
Introduction: Start with briefly
introducing what we will be reading in this essay by addressing questions
like:

–      
What is the purpose of the study? Please clearly state your
theoretical motivation in addition to the practical/managerial or personal
relevance.

DESCRIBE THE EXPERIENCE

•       
Stage 1: Description of the event

–      
Describe in detail
the event you are reflecting on. Include e.g. where were you; who else was
there; why were you there; what were you doing; what were other people doing;
what was the context of the event; what happened; what was your part in this;
what parts did the other people play; what was the result.

•       
Stage 2: Feelings

–      
At this stage try
to recall and explore the things that were going on inside your head i.e. why
does this event stick in your mind. Include e.g. how you were feeling when
the event started; what you were thinking about at the time; how did it make
you feel; how did other people make you feel; how did you feel about the outcome
of the event; what do you think about it now. 

EXAMINE THE EXPERIENCE

 

•       
Stage 3: Evaluation

–      
Try to evaluate or
make a judgement about what has happened. Consider what was good about the
experience and what was bad about the experience or didn’t go so well

•       
Stage 4: Analysis

–      
Break the event
down into its component parts so they can be explored separately. You may
need to ask more detailed questions about the answers to the last stage. Include
e.g. what went well; what did you do well; what did others do well; what went
wrong or did not turn out how it should have done; in what way did you or
others contribute to this

ARTICULATE(REFLEXIVE) LEARNING

•       
Stage 5: Conclusion

–      
This differs from
the evaluation stage in that now you have explored the issue from different
angles and have a lot of information to base your judgement. It is here that
you are likely to develop insights into your own and other people’s behaviour
in terms of how they contributed to the outcome of the event. Remember the
purpose of reflection is to learn from an experience. Without detailed
analysis and honest exploration that occurs during all the previous stages,
it is unlikely that all aspects of the event will be taken into account and
therefore valuable opportunities for learning can be missed. During this stage,
you should ask yourself what you could have done differently.

 

•       
Stage 6: Action Plan

–      
During this stage
you should think yourself forward into encountering the event again and to
plan what you would do – would you act differently or would you be likely to
do the same?  Here the cycle is
tentatively completed and suggests that should the event occur again it will
be the focus of another reflective cycle

 

 

 

How to Submit your Assessment

 

The assessment must be submitted by Monday, 5th of February 2024 (12:00 noon) on Turnitin.
No paper copies are required. You can access the submission link through the
module web.

 

·      
Your coursework will be given a zero
mark if you do not submit a copy through Turnitin. Please take care to ensure
that  you have fully submitted your
work.

·      
Please ensure that you have submitted
your work using the correct file format, unreadable files will receive a mark
of zero. The Faculty accepts Microsoft Office and PDF documents, unless
otherwise advised by the module leader.

·      
All work submitted after the
submission deadline without a valid and approved reason will be subject to
the University
regulations on late submissions.

o  
If an assessment is submitted up
to 14 days late the mark for the work will be capped at the pass mark of 40
per cent for undergraduate modules or 50 per cent for postgraduate modules

o  
If an assessment is submitted
beyond 14 calendar days late the work will receive a mark of zero per cent

o  
The above applies to a
student’s first attempt at the assessment. If work submitted as a
reassessment of a previously failed assessment task is submitted later than
the deadline the work will immediately be given a mark of zero per
cent

o  
If an assessment which is marked as
pass/fail rather than given a percentage mark is submitted later than the
deadline, the work will immediately be marked as a fail

·      
The
University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events
happen which mean that you can’t submit your coursework by the deadline –
these events should be beyond your control and not easy to predict.  If
this happens, you can apply for an extension to your deadline for up to two
weeks, or if you need longer, you can apply for a deferral, which takes you
to the next assessment period (for example, to the
re-sit period following the main Assessment Boards). You must apply before
the deadline. You will find information about applying for extensions and deferrals
here.

·      
Students MUST keep a copy and/or an
electronic file of their assignment.

·      
Checks will be made on your work
using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites.

 

 

 

 

 

Return of Marked Work

 

You can expect to
have feedback returned to you within 15 working days. If for any reason there
is a delay you will be kept informed. Marks and feedback will be provided
online using the grade mark descriptors and rubric on Turnitin. It is
important that you access the feedback you receive as this will help to make
improvements to your later work, you can request a meeting with your Module
Leader or Personal Tutor to discuss your feedback in more detail.

 

Marks will have
been internally moderated only, and will therefore be provisional; your mark
will be formally agreed later in the year once the external examiner has
completed their review. More information on assessment and feedback can be found here.

 

 

 

Academic Integrity

 

In submitting a piece of work for assessment it is essential
that you understand the University’s requirements for maintaining academic
integrity and ensure that the work does not contravene University regulations.
Some examples of behaviour that would not be considered acceptable include
plagiarism, re-use of previously assessed work, collusion with others and
purchasing your assignment from a third party. For more information on
academic offences, bad academic practice, and academic penalties, please read
chapter four of our
academic regulations.

 

 

 

Academic Support and Your Well-being

 

Referencing is the process of acknowledging other people’s work
when you have used it in your assignment or research. It allows the reader to
locate your source material as quickly and easily as possible so that they
can read these sources themselves and verify the validity of your arguments.
Referencing provides the link between what you write and the evidence on
which it is based.

You identify the sources that you have used by citing them in
the text of your assignment (called citations or in-text
citations) and referencing them at the end of your assignment (called
the reference list or end-text citations). The
reference list only includes the sources cited in your text. The main referencing
guide can be found
here
and includes information on the basics of referencing and achieving good academic practice. It also has tabs for
the specific referencing styles depending on whether you require Harvard style used in business or OSCOLA style used by the Law school.

The University has a wealth of support services
available to students; further information can be obtained from Student Gateway, the Student Advice
Centre, Library and Learning Services and, most importantly, your Personal Tutor. If you are struggling
with your assessments and/or deadlines please do seek help as soon as possible
so that appropriate support and guidance can be identified and put in place
for you. More information can be found on the Healthy DMU pages.

 

 

 

APPENDIX 3: Faculty of Business and Law Grade Descriptors

 

This is a guide to the criteria used by staff in the Faculty of Business and Law assigning a mark to a piece of undergraduate work.  The final mark awarded to a piece of work will be informed by its predominant correspondence to these descriptors.  The University generic descriptors as well as advice for students can be accessed at:

http://www.dmu.ac.uk/about-dmu/quality-management-and-policy/academic-quality/learning-teaching-assessment/mark-descriptors.aspx

 

Modules are marked on a range of 0-100%.  Mark descriptors are given in the table below.  A mark below 40% indicates a Fail grade (the shaded boxes).

 

Mark Range

Criteria

Classification

90-100%

Indicates that no fault can be found with the work other than very
minor errors, for example typographical, or perhaps failure to satisfy the
most challenging and exacting demands of the assessment.

First class honours Distinction

80-89%

Indicates a very high level of understanding evidenced by an ability
to engage critically and analytically with source material.  Likely to exhibit independent lines of
argument. Only minor errors or omissions.

First class honours Distinction

70-79%

Judged to be very good, yet not outstanding. May contain minor
errors or omissions. A well-developed response showing clear knowledge and
the ability to interpret and/or apply that knowledge.

First class honours Distinction

60-69%

Indicates a sound understanding of basic points and principles but
with some failure to express or to apply them properly. Hence the answer is
essentially correct, has some errors or omissions, and is not seriously
flawed.

Upper second-class honours
(2:1)

Merit

50-59%

Indicates a more limited understanding of basic points and
principles, with significant errors and omissions.  These errors and omissions, however, do not
cast doubt on the basic level of understanding.

Lower second-class
honours (2:2)

Pass

40-49%

Indicates questionable understanding of basic points and principles
yet sufficient to show that learning outcomes have been achieved at a
rudimentary level.

Third-class              honours

Pass

30-39%

Indicates an answer that shows only weakly developed elements of
understanding.  The learning outcomes
have been insufficiently realised.

Fail

20-29%

Very little knowledge has been demonstrated and the presentation
shows little coherence of material or argument.

Fail

0-19%

Only isolated or no knowledge displayed.

Fail