Solved: Critical Reflection and Developing Practice
Final Assessment Guidelines – Part 2
Module title: Critical Reflection and Developing Practice
Assessment Point: Part 2 Assessment task: Critical Reflection Word count limit: 2,000 words
Submission deadline: Please consult the VLE.
Submission procedure: Please submit via the submission link on the VLE.
Extenuating circumstances
If you are experiencing unforeseen personal circumstances that are affecting your ability to submit within the stipulated deadlines, you are required to communicate these issues to the Unicaf Extenuating Circumstances team in the first instance, via extenuating.circumstances@unicaf.org, for further information on how to make a personal circumstances application for consideration.
Personal circumstances requests may usually only be made within 5 working days of the original deadline unless valid justification, along with appropriate evidence, exists to show that you could not have reasonably communicated the issues any earlier. It is important to keep in mind that if the claim is not upheld and you have not submitted by the deadline, the module shall be failed as a result of no submission of the summative assessment.
Academic misconduct including plagiarism
………
……….
……….
By submitting your work you acknowledge that you have read and agree with the above statements.
General Guidance
Your assignment should be word processed (handwritten assignments are not accepted), using time new roman size 12 font, double spaced, with numbered pages and your student number printed as a footer on every page.
The word limits stated for this assignment excludes the reference list at the end of the assignment but includes all text in the main body of the assignment (including direct quotations, in-text citations, footnotes, tables, diagrams and graphs).
Please be aware that exceeding the word count limit will affect the academic judgement of the piece of work and may result in the award of a lower mark.
Appendices are not considered a supplement, and thus, will not be assessed as part of the content of the assignment. As such, they will not contribute to the grade awarded, however it may be appropriate to use an Appendices section for any material which is a useful reference for the reader. Please note that appendices are not included in the word count.
The majority of references should come from primary sources (e.g., journal articles, conference papers, reports, etc.) although you can also utilise area specific textbooks. You must ensure that you use the Harvard style of referencing.
Please indicate the word count length at the end of your assignment.
Please note that you are required to submit an extended literature review project where you will critically evaluate scholarly articles and books in order to answer specific research questions.
NO STUDENT WILL BE ALLOWED TO COLLECT ANY PRIMARY DATA
Marking and assessment
Your final summative assessment weighs 40% of your final grade.
Learning outcomes assessed in this assessment
- Critically analyse relevant academic sources in the area of interest.
- Critically reflect on own experience in the domain and provide discussion about how theoretical perspectives may affect practice.
Assessment Guidelines
A critical reflection on two examples of taking a leadership stance and/or application of mentoring skills in your practice, which are contextualised and evaluated in contemporary theories and research in the field.
Structure of Professional Portfolio
Your work should include and cover the following sections/aspects and content (as shown and stated in the table below). The specific percentage marks allocated to each section/aspect of your work is stated below. Please also note that the Level 7 marking criteria (located towards the end of this assessment brief) will also be used to reflect this overall grade. Please remember that achievement and demonstration of both learning outcomes (1 and 2) is being assessed in this assessment.
| Summative assessment criteria for the CRITICAL REFLECTION | Available marks | |
| Criteria | Explanation of Criteria | 100/100 |
| Introduction and rationale | Introduce what the assignment’s focus will be Give some background here on your first thoughts. Provide the context and the rationale of your literature review and possible debates around this research area. | 10 |
| Aims and objectives | Explain the aims and objectives of the study. | 10 |
| Methodology | Explain your search strategy (How did you go about this? Books? Journals? Databases etc.?) – ensure the validity and reliability of the research studies you included in your text. Examples contextualized and evaluated in contemporary theories and research in the field. | 20 |
| Findings of the literature review | What does the literature tell you in relation to your perception? Do the findings reflect your leadership stance or mentoring skills? | 25 |
| Conclusions and Implications | Try to summarise your work and discuss your implications and recommendations. This section should not include any new material. | 20 |
| Presentation criteria | Cover Page, Table of Contents, Page numbering, Margins, Line spacing, Appendices (if it is necessary), Font consistency, Separation of paragraphs. | 10 |
| Harvard referencing | Citations and reference list according to the Harvard referencing guide. | 5 |
Marking Criteria
| Mark range | Performance characteristic | Grading criteria |
| 90-100 | Exceptional Pass | Exemplary attainment of all learning outcomesDemonstrates an outstanding synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaWide-ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefrontof the disciplineOffers an exhaustive exploration of the literature and evidence-baseThe material covered is accurate and relevantThe argument is highly sophisticatedThe standard of writing is refinedNo errors in the use of the specified referencing systemWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 80-89 | Outstanding Pass | Excellent attainment of all learning outcomes, with some met to an exemplary standardDemonstrates a comprehensive synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject area. Wide-ranging emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineExtends far beyond expected levels of engagement with the literature and evidence- baseThe material covered is accurate and relevantThe argument is generally very astuteThe standard of writing is refinedNo errors in the use of the specified referencing systemWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 70-79 | Excellent pass | Excellent attainment of all learning outcomesDemonstrates a thorough synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaStrong emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineThorough use the literature and evidence-baseThe material covered is accurate and relevantThe argument is persuasive and there are very perceptive elementsThe standard of writing is refinedNo errors in the use of the specified referencing systemWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 60-69 | Good Pass | Good attainment of all learning outcomesDemonstrates detailed synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaGood emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineGood consideration of the literature and evidence-base that develops from recommended readingsThe material covered is accurate and relevantThe argument is persuasiveThe standard of writing is refinedNo errors in the use of the specified referencing systemWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 50-59 | Pass | Adequate attainment of all learning outcomesDemonstrates a limited, but sufficient, synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaSome emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineSufficient consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but little consideration beyond recommended readingsThe material covered is mostly accurate and relevantThe argument is straightforward and relatively clearThe standard of writing is well clear and readable, with some sophisticated phrasingNo errors in the use of the specified referencing systemWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 40-49 | Needs some improvement | Meets most, but not all learning outcomesDemonstrates limited synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaLess than expected emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineBasic consideration of the literature and evidence-base, but restricted to recommended readingsSome inaccuracies or irrelevant materials that suggest confusion and misunderstandingThe argument is relatively clear, although some elements are difficult to understandThe standard of writing is well clear and readable, but overly simplisticMinor errors in the use of the specified referencing system, but meets key principlesWell-presented and organised in an appropriate academic style. |
| 30-39 | Needs major improvement | Approximately half the learning outcomes are metDemonstrates very little synthesis of varied theoretical positions in the analysis of key issues in the subject areaLittle emphasis on knowledge and ideas that are at the forefront of the disciplineMinor consideration of the literature and evidence-base, with inadequate use of recommended reading and no exploration outside that |