1
TCCE Assignment Brief Academic Year 2023

1. Module code
and title:
FDY3006 [Thinking Critically, Creatively
and Ethically
4. Module Convener:
Kathleen Hinwood

2. Assignments
No. and
types:
A1- Individual Portfolio Analysis
5. Assessment
weighting:
50%

3. Submission
time and dates:
*** Mandatory: All
students must submit
their assignment for
formative feedback
Formative Feedback Submission
[Mandatory***]:
Week 8
23/04/2023 Sunday 23.59
Final Submission Due:
Week 9
30/04/2023 Sunday 23.59
6. Target feedback
provisional
moderated mark**:
(**Note the LPTC’s working day
feedback deadline and SMU’s
moderation do not include bank
holidays, weekends or periods
when the college is closed)
22/05/2023

7. Assignment task

Assignment 1 is an individual portfolio of thinking critically, creatively and ethically application, engaging
the student with textual and contextual reasoning and their assessment of strengths, weaknesses and
ethicality. The assignment task is comprised of three sections, each part, equivalent to 300-words with an
overall word count of approx. 1000 words (+/- 10%) to be prepared for this submission.

8. Assignment task, CW1 has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your
achievement of a selection or all of the following module learning outcomes as designated below:

Assignment 1
LO1. Identify the logic (or lack of it) in basic arguments and common opinions in a
variety of contexts
LO2. Construct basic arguments critically and creatively.
LO3. Explain the importance of being curious about one’s own values and that of others

9. Tasks requirements

The student is expected to collate a portfolio of three 300-word pieces of written and developed
work that involves assigned contemporary topics of different situational contexts (health, social
media, television, remote work, business, politics etc.) by the module instructor to demonstrate
meeting the module’s learning outcomes. These tasks are as follows:

a. Using mind mapping, apply the analytical thinking processes to a selected topic
b. Using tabulation, apply the standards of thinking to assess the shape or absence of
appropriate reasoning determining the situation and its participants in the assigned
case scenario
c. Using Kialo-edu.com, construct an argument creatively as a result of applying the elements
of critical thinking

10. Notes for Guidance:

A1 Notes for Guidance:
• Your portfolio should include a brief introduction about what you intend to write about and
a conclusion that involves a critical reflection, using some elements of Cotrell’s (2017)
Critical Reflection Core Model or an equivalence to it in critical reflection thinking (e.g.,
(Borton, 1970), on one or two of the key learnings that you benefited from the tasks
accomplished for A1.
• You should include a cover page with full identifiers (e.g., Module, Academic Year etc.) and
an alphanumeric Table of Contents.
• You are expected to learn using a mind-mapping digital application, create formatted
table to capture analysis and evaluation, and utilise the Kialo-edu application for
evidential claim and counter-claim argument construction.
• All Illustrations and tabulations used in the portfolio to be correctly titled and referenced
• All submissions must be submitted on Moodle by the due date mentioned above in Item [3].
• The written part of the coursework should be in Word Document [e.g., MS Word), 12-pt Times
New Roman or Arial Font [Unless instructed otherwise], with 2.0 line spacing with appropriate
sectioned headings and page numbers
• A reference list related to discipline of business management is expected, with a minimum of
five citations included. These must demonstrate that the student has deployed a range of
literature sources, e.g., books, journals, articles, company documents, credible websites etc.

11. Referencing and research requirements

Please cite your work using the Harvard style, which can be found at
http://www.citethemrightonline.com.stmarys.idm.oclc.org/ . This information is also available in book form:
Pears, R., and Shields, G. (2016). Cite them right: the essential reference guide. 10th eds. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan. Copies are available via the University library.

12. Module’s List of Key and Suggested Texts

You are strongly advised to use the list of references that is relevant to your module and the field of study in
business management to back up or contextualise your claims in your written development.
You should avoid having references and in-text citation that are generic, unrelated to the field of study and
not accessible to you.
You are reminded that each students have access to London PT College’s Perlego Digital Library, where you
are assigned a list of relevant references that you can use to meeting the learning outcomes of the module
and be able to meet the scholarly practice in your assignment development.
Key and recommended texts:
Cottrell, S. (2017). Critical thinking skills: effective analysis, argument and reflection. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Nussbaum, M. (2016) Not for Profit. [edition unavailable]. Princeton University Press. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/739620/not-for-profit-why-democracy-needs-the-humanities-updated-edition-pdf
Plato (2016) The Apology and Related Dialogues. [edition unavailable]. Broadview Press. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/2029523/the-apology-and-related-dialogues-pdf
Berkley, S. (2021) Guide to Learning the Art of Critical Thinking: Conceptualizing, Analyzing, Evaluating, Reasoning
& Communication. [edition unavailable]. Abbott Properties. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/3728487/guide-to-learning-the-art-of-critical-thinking-conceptualizing-analyzing
evaluating-reasoning-communication-pdf.
Jackson, D. and Newberry, P. (2015) Critical Thinking. [edition unavailable]. Cengage Learning EMEA. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/801765/critical-thinking-a-users-manual-pdf
Black, B. (2011) An A to Z of Critical Thinking. 1st edn. Bloomsbury Publishing. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/805835/an-a-to-z-of-critical-thinking-pdf
Ordonez, K. (2014) Critical Thinking and its Applications. [edition unavailable]. World Technologies. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/1296083/critical-thinking-and-its-applications-pdf
Edberg, H. (2018) Creative Writing for Critical Thinking. [edition unavailable]. Springer International Publishing.
Available at: https://www.perlego.com/book/3493494/creative-writing-for-critical-thinking-creating-a-discoursal-identity
pdf.
Frohman, R. and Lupton, K. (2020) Critical Thinking for Nursing, Health and Social Care. 1st edn. Bloomsbury
Publishing. Available at: https://www.perlego.com/book/2997470/critical-thinking-for-nursing-health-and-social-care-pdf.
Katz, L. (2018) Critical Thinking and Persuasive Writing for Postgraduates. 1st edn. Bloomsbury Publishing. Available
at: https://www.perlego.com/book/2997427/critical-thinking-and-persuasive-writing-for-postgraduates-pdf
Bruce, I. (2020) Expressing Critical Thinking through Disciplinary Texts. 1st edn. Bloomsbury Publishing. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/1504176/expressing-critical-thinking-through-disciplinary-texts-insights-from-five-genre
studies-pdf.
Adair, J. (2009) The Art of Creative Thinking. 1st edn. Kogan Page. Available at:
https://www.perlego.com/book/1589776/the-art-of-creative-thinking-how-to-be-innovative-and-develop-great-ideas-pdf

13. Academic Integrity

You are reminded of the SMU policy that stresses academic integrity and how important it is to
avoid unfair practices and academic misconduct when doing your academic assignments.
The University’s academic misconduct regulations can be viewed on the University website:
https://www.stmarys.ac.uk/registry/policies/academic-misconduct.aspx. In submitting your
assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.
If you need further assistance to ensure having assessment submissions in line with Academic
Integrity policies, you are encouraged to contact the Academic Support Unit at London PT College.

11. Referencing and research requirements

Please cite your work using the Harvard style, which can be found at
http://www.citethemrightonline.com.stmarys.idm.oclc.org/ . This information is also available in book
form: Pears, R., and Shields, G. (2016). Cite them right: the essential reference guide. 10th eds.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Copies are available via the University library.

12. Submission Detail

• All assignments must be on Moodle VLE and should be uploaded personally. Any other channels
of assignment submission, such as emails, must be avoided.
• All your module instructors will ask you to upload your assignment for formative feedback before
you turn in the full assignment by the deadline. This request will give you the tech skills you need
to confidently upload your assignment by the due date.
• If you have a technical issue for any reason, you need to report the incident in advance and not
after the deadline.
• The contact information for Moodle-related incidents and other enquiries is
moodle@lptcollege.co.uk.

13. Academic Integrity

You are reminded of the SMU policy that stresses academic integrity and how important it is to avoid unfair
practices and academic misconduct when doing your academic assignments.
The University’s academic misconduct regulations can be viewed on the University website:
https://www.stmarys.ac.uk/registry/policies/academic-misconduct.aspx. In submitting your assignment, you
are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.
If you need further assistance to ensure having assessment submissions in line with Academic Integrity
policies, you are encouraged to contact the Academic Support Unit at London PT College.

14. Marking Criteria-[How will your work be assessed]

Research [JISC 2015, Deneen, C 2015, Husain, S. et al. 2018] has shown that assessment literacy,
including the marking rubric, will empower students to achieve higher scores and grade results.
Your work will be graded based on how well it shows that you’ve met the stated learning outcomes for the
designated assignment (see above) and against other criteria and performance indicators as presented in
the Assessment Rubric for Level 3.
You are expected to be familiar with the Marking Assessment Criteria related to the module, and the
lecturer will advise you on optimising your effort and achievement accordingly.
This assignment will be marked, adapted and mapped in line with SMU’s grading descriptors for
Foundation Year Level 3.
Please check the assessment criteria or marking grid below and on Moodle.

15. Marking Criteria-[How will your work be assessed]

Attributes, Grades and Marking Bands

SMU Level 3
FHEQ
Assessment
Criteria
Module
Assessment
Criteria &
weighting
relative to
TCCE’s Four
Learning
Outcomes
Accomplished &
Exemplary
Competent &
Proficient
Developing and
Growing
Emerging &
Satisfactory
Beginning & Up to Par
Unsatisfactory
Substandard

80-100
70-79
60-69
50-59
40-49
30-39
0-29

Knowledge
and
Understandi
ng
Description of
Purpose
(15%)
Excellent demonstration of
the aim and requirements of
the Individual Portfolio in its
overall introduction and in
each of its sub-parts,
showing an articulate and
confident discipline-related
vocabulary and ability to set
out the context of the
portfolio’s critical activities
and their utilised resources.
Very good demonstration of
the aim and requirements of
the Individual Portfolio in its
overall introduction and in
each of its sub-parts,
showing an articulate
discipline-related
vocabulary and ability to set
out the context of the
portfolio’s critical activities
and their utilised resources.
Good demonstration of
the aim and requirements
of the Individual Portfolio
in either its overall
introduction or in each of
its sub-parts, showing a
reasonable attempt of a
discipline-related
vocabulary and an attempt
to set out the context of
the portfolio’s critical
activities and their utilised
resources.
Sound demonstration of the
aim and requirements of the
Individual Portfolio in its
overall introduction and in
each of its sub-parts,
showing an articulate
discipline-related
vocabulary and ability to set
out the context of the
portfolio’s critical activities
and their utilised resources.
Satisfactory demonstration of the
aim or requirements of the
Individual Portfolio in its overall
introduction or in some of its sub
parts, showing some use of
discipline-related vocabulary and
little contextualisation or referral
to the portfolio’s critical activities
and their utilised resources.
Limited demonstration of having a
focused idea of the aim and
requirements of the Individual
Portfolio as instructed in
Assignment Brief and the
supplementary resources regarding
its overall Introduction and in each
of its sub-parts, showing a limited
articulation of a discipline-related
vocabulary and their relevance in
setting out the context of the
portfolio’s critical activities and the
utilised resources.
Too limited to no demonstration
of any focused idea that assists in
informing about the aim and
requirements of the Individual
Portfolio in its overall
introduction, and likely to have
missing one or all the sub-parts,
showing little evidence of any
exposure to discipline-related
vocabulary and its role in setting
out the relevant context for the
portfolio’s critical activities and
their utilised resources.

Intellectual
Skills &
Scholarly
Practice
Framework
Articulation and
Application
(35%)
Excellent articulation of
each of the three
conceptual frameworks
related to critical thinking
on the assigned two case
studies and a topic of
contention, conveying
through each application
[e.g. mind-mapping,
Reasoning Elements to
Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] and
observance of the theory
laden resources and
scholarly practice to back-up
appropriate and skilful
analysis [e.g. Thinking
through Method],
assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of
the Wheel of EoT] and/or
creative construction [e.g.
argumentation logic] of
reasoning
Very good articulation of
each of the three
conceptual frameworks
related to critical thinking
on the assigned two case
studies and topic of
contention, conveying
through each application
[e.g. mind-mapping,
Reasoning Elements to
Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] and
observance of the theory
laden resources and
scholarly practice to back-up
appropriate and skilful
analysis and observance of
the theory-laden resources
and scholarly practice to
back-up appropriate and
skilful analysis [e.g. Thinking
through Method],
assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of
the Wheel of EoT] and/or
creative construction [e.g.
argumentation logic] of
reasoning
Good articulation of the
each of the three
conceptual frameworks
related to critical thinking
on the assigned two case
studies and topic of
contention, conveying
through each application
[e.g. mind-mapping,
Reasoning Elements to
Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] and
observance of the theory
laden resources and
scholarly practice to back
up appropriate and skilful
analysis and observance of
the theory-laden
resources and scholarly
practice to back-up
appropriate and skilful
analysis [e.g. Thinking
through Method],
assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of
the Wheel of EoT] and/or
creative construction [e.g.
argumentation logic] of
reasoning
Reasonable articulation of
two of three conceptual
frameworks related to
critical thinking, conveying
through each application
[e.g. mind-mapping,
Reasoning Elements to
Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] of two of
three theory-laden
resources and some
scholarly practice to back-up
appropriate use of analysis
[e.g. Thinking through
Method], assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of
the Wheel of EoT] and/or
creative construction [e.g.
argumentation logic] of
reasoning
Satisfactory use of each or one of
the three conceptual frameworks
related to critical thinking on
assigned or non-assigned case
studies and topics of contention,
conveying through some of the
theory-laden applications [e.g.
mind-mapping, Reasoning
Elements to Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] and some scholarly
practice leading to satisfactory
and general analysis [e.g.
Thinking through Method],
assessment [e.g. Assessment
Standards of the Wheel of EoT]
and/or limited creative
construction [e.g. argumentation
logic] of reasoning
Limited use of each of the three
conceptual frameworks related to
critical thinking on assigned or non
assigned case studies and a topic of
contention, conveying through
each application limited use of
relevant and appropriate resources
[e.g. mind-mapping, Reasoning
Elements to Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction], indicating
unsatisfactory use of the skills of
analysis [e.g. Thinking through
Method], assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of the
Wheel of EoT] and/or creative
construction [e.g. argumentation
logic] of reasoning
Too limited to no articulation of
any of the three conceptual
frameworks related to critical
thinking on assigned or non
assigned case studies and a topic
of contention, conveying no
attempts to use the suggested
theory-laden resources [e.g.
mind-mapping, Reasoning
Elements to Standards Matrix
tabulation, Kialo argument
construction] to do appropriate
analysis [e.g. Thinking through
Method], assessment [e.g.
Assessment Standards of the
Wheel of EoT] and/or creative
construction [e.g. argumentation
logic] of reasoning

Critical
Enquiry and
Scholarly
practice and
Involvement
Explanatory
Critical
Reflection,
scholarly
practice and
Engagement
(30%)
Excellent awareness of how
critical thinking about
others’ values and their
thinking elements can be
enriching and rewarding to
the improvements of one’s
own values and learning
outcomes through one of
the reflection model
guidance [e.g. Driscoll’s
“What, So what, & Now
what?”], with evidence of
challenging one’s enquiry
strategies through the
engagement in the
“Interactive Assignment
Guidelines Challenge”
activity on assigned
platforms (e.g. Moodle or
Rise Platforms)
Very good awareness of
how critical thinking
about others’ values and
their thinking elements
can be enriching and
rewarding to the
improvements of one’s
own values and learning
outcomes through one of
the reflection model
guidance [e.g. Driscoll’s
“What, So what, & Now
what?”, with evidence of
challenging one’s enquiry
strategies through the
engagement in the
“Interactive Assignment
Guidelines Challange”
activity on assigned
platforms (e.g. Moodle or
Rise Platforms)
Good awareness of
how critical thinking
about others’ values
and their thinking
elements is partially
contributing to
enriching and rewarding
the improvements of
one’s own values and
learning outcomes
through one of the
reflection model
guidance [e.g. Driscoll’s
“What, So what, & Now
what?”], with partial
evidence of challenging
one’s enquiry strategies
through the
engagement in the
“Interactive Assignment
Guidelines Challenge”
activity on assigned
platforms (e.g. Moodle
or Rise Platforms)
Functional awareness of
how critical thinking
about others’ values and
thinking elements has a
contribution, in one or
more of the three areas
of applications, to the
improvements of one’s
own values and learning
outcomes, enabled by a
roundedly suitable
application of the
reflection model [e.g.
Driscoll’s “What, So what,
& Now what?”]; partial
evidence of challenging
one’s enquiry strategies
through an engagement
in the “Interactive
Assignment Guidelines
Challenge” on assigned
platforms (e.g. Moodle or
Rise Platforms).
Satisfactory awareness of how
critical thinking about others’
values and thinking elements
have a contribution to
improving one’s own values
and learning outcomes
enabled by some indicators of
partial application of the
reflection model [e.g.
Driscoll’s “What, So what, &
Now what?”]; partial to no
evidence of challenging one’s
enquiry strategies through an
engagement in the
“Interactive Assignment
Guidelines Challenge” activity
on assigned platforms (e.g.
Moodle or Rise Platforms).
Limited awareness of how
critical thinking about others’
values and thinking elements
can be enriching and rewarding
to the improvements of one’s
own values and learning
outcomes with no evidence of
using any of the reflection
model guidance [e.g. Driscoll’s
“What, So what, & Now
what?”], and with no evidence
of challenging one’s enquiry
strategies through the
engagement in the “Interactive
Assignment Guidelines
Challenge” activity on the
assigned platforms (e.g. Moodle
or Rise Platforms).
Too Limited to no awareness
of how critical thinking about
others’ values and thinking
elements can be contributing
to the improvements of one’s
own values and learning
outcomes with no evidence of
using any of the reflection
model guidance [e.g. Driscoll’s
“What, So what, & Now
what?”], and with no evidence
of challenging one’s enquiry
strategies through the
engagement in the
“Interactive Assignment
Guidelines Challenge” activity
on the assigned platforms (e.g.
Moodle or Rise Platforms).

Professional
and Life Skills
Professional
Layout
Elements and
Presentation
(20%)
Excellent adherence to
guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates the
professional requirements of
reporting and presenting in a
business environment, proving
excellent skillset gains in
communicating effectively
(80/80) as the result of the
following: 1) appropriate
grammar and spelling, 2)
headings and subheadings, 3)
progressive and structural
textual and non-textual
development [supported by
relevant Screenshot or
illustrations], 4) captioning with
right Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in Harvard
style [Five Minimum], 6)
creative and proper cover page
layout and identifiers, 7)
adequate alphanumeric table of
content, and 8) word count
within + or – 10%, all are
contributing to conveying
cohesiveness, coherence and
impact.
Very good adherence to
guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates the
professional requirements
of reporting and presenting
in a business environment,
proving very good skillset
gains in communicating
effectively as the result of
having the majority (70/80)
of the following: 1)
appropriate grammar and
spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3) progressive
and structural textual and
non-textual development
[supported by relevant
Screenshot or illustrations],
4) captioning with right
Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in
Harvard style [Five
Minimum], 6) creative and
proper cover page layout
and identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of
content, and 8) word count
within + or – 10%, all are
contributing to conveying
cohesiveness, coherence
and impact.
Good adherence to
guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates to
a large extent the
professional requirements
of reporting and
presenting in a business
environment, proving
good skillset gains in
communicating as the
result of having some
(50/80) of the following: 1)
appropriate grammar and
spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3)
progressive and structural
textual and non-textual
development [supported
by relevant Screenshot or
illustrations], 4) captioning
with right Figure or Table
labels and titles, 5)
referencing in Harvard
style [Five Minimum], 6)
creative and proper cover
page layout and
identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of
content, and 8) word
count within + or – 10%,
some are contributing to
conveying cohesiveness,
coherence and impact.
Functional adherence to
guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates
partially the professional
requirements of reporting
and presenting in a business
environment, proving
reasonable skillset gains in
communicating reasonably
as the result of some to less
(40/80) of the following: 1)
appropriate grammar and
spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3) progressive
and structural textual and
non-textual development
[supported by relevant
Screenshot or illustrations],
4) captioning with right
Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in
Harvard style [Five
Minimum], 6) creative and
proper cover page layout
and identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of
content, and 8) word count
within + or – 10%, some are
contributing to conveying
cohesiveness, coherence
and impact.
Satisfactory adherence to some
of the guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates partially
the professional requirements of
reporting and presenting in a
business environment, proving to
have few of the skillset gains that
avoid having miscommunication
as the result of having a few
(30/80) of the following: 1)
appropriate grammar and
spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3) progressive and
structural textual and non-textual
development [supported by
relevant Screenshot or
illustrations], 4) captioning with
right Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in Harvard
style [Five Minimum], 6) creative
and proper cover page layout and
identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of content,
and 8) word count within + or –
10%, some are contributing to
conveying cohesiveness,
coherence and impact.
Limited adherence to guidelines in
presenting a portfolio, ending up in
having noticeable gaps in
emulating the professional
requirements of reporting and
presenting it in a business
environment, proving little skillset
gains in communicating as the
result of having few of the
following requirements met
(20/80):1) appropriate grammar
and spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3) progressive and
structural textual and non-textual
development [supported by
relevant Screenshot or
illustrations], 4) captioning with
right Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in Harvard
style [Five Minimum], 6) creative
and proper cover page layout and
identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of content, and
8) word count within + or – 10%,
many of them are not contributing
to conveying cohesiveness,
coherence and impact.
Little to no adherence to
guidelines in presenting a
portfolio that emulates the
professional requirements of
reporting and presenting in a
business environment, proving
little to no skillset gains in
communicating appropriately as
the result of having one or none
(10-0/80) of the following: 1)
appropriate grammar and
spelling, 2) headings and
subheadings, 3) progressive and
structural textual and non-textual
development [supported by
relevant Screenshot or
illustrations], 4) captioning with
right Figure or Table labels and
titles, 5) referencing in Harvard
style [Five Minimum], 6) creative
and proper cover page layout and
identifiers, 7) adequate
alphanumeric table of content,
and 8) word count within + or –
10%, many of them are not
contributing to conveying
cohesiveness, coherence and
impact, none of them are
contributing to conveying
cohesiveness, coherence and
impact.

The post [Thinking Critically, Creatively and Ethically appeared first on My blog.

Related posts: