AC4057-Business Law and Ethics S25 (1st Sit) – GRP QP

COURSEWORK QUESTION PAPER: 1st sit

Spring 2025 Semester-long

Module Code:

AC4057

Module Title:

Business Law and Ethics

Module Leader:

Nischaya Subedi (Islington College)

Coursework Type:

Group Coursework:

Individually assessed group presentations – 20 minutes

Coursework Weight:

This coursework accounts for 40% of your total module grades.

Submission Date:

TBA

When Coursework is given out:

Week 8

Submission Instructions:

You are required to a group to develop a presentation of the given topic

● Submit the copy of powerpoint on the due date given by RTE before coming for the presentation.

● The presentation date and time of your group will be provided by the module lecturer a week before.

● Each group are required to submit these files to the RTE as a part of formal submission.

1. A copy of Powerpoint file: <<group name>>.pptx 2. Group Contribution Log (pdf)

3. 1 page presentation synopsis (pdf)

Warning:

London Metropolitan University and Islington College takes Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with sternly.

Level 3/4

Level 5

Level 6

General

Acquisition of broad

knowledge

Evaluate information

Use information to plan, develop and problem solve

Generate ideas through analysing concepts

Demonstrate a command of specialised skills

Formulate responses to well defined and abstract

Analyse and evaluate

information

Critically review, consolidate and extend a body of

knowledge using specialised skills

Critically evaluate concepts and evidence from a range of sources

Transfer and apply skills and exercise significant

judgement in a range of situations

70-100

(A)

Very good

Demonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal

Use of a wide variety of

appropriate sources

Transformation of knowledge Independent thinking and development of ideas

Ability to

communication very clearly and effectively

Very good evidence of

preparation

Excellent

Advanced scholarship

Goes beyond the material provided

Excellent link to research Excellent analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical

appraisal

Excellent evidence of

preparation

Comprehensive and critical understanding of the topic Excellent ability to

communicate clearly and effectively

Excellent organisation,

structure and presentation of work

Excellent – Outstanding (for use at far end of range)

Outstanding understanding, exploration and insight

Strong evidence of originality and development of own ideas

Develop a highly complex argument

Outstanding ability to

communicate topics clearly and concisely

Advanced organisation, structure and presentation of work

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errors

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

quantity). No errors in

reference list or citations.

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

quantity). No errors in

reference list or citations.

quantity). No errors in

reference list or citations. References well utilised and critiqued

60-69 (B)

Very good

Demonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation

Use of a wide variety of

appropriate sources

Transformation of knowledge Independent thinking and development of ideas

Ability to communication clearly and effectively

Very good evidence of

preparation

Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errors

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

quantity). Minimal or no

errors in reference list or citations.

Very good

Demonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation

Use of a wide variety of

appropriate sources

Transformation of knowledge Independent thinking and development of ideas

Ability to communication clearly and effectively

Very good evidence of

preparation

Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errors

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

quantity). Minimal or no

errors in reference list or citations.

Very Good

Advanced scholarship

Goes beyond the material provided

Very good link to research Very good analysis,

synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal

Very good evidence of

preparation

Comprehensive and critical understanding of the topic Very good ability to

communicate clearly and effectively

Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work

Good references, appropriate sources (quality and

quantity). No errors in

reference list or citations.

50-59 (C)

Adequate – Satisfactory

Some analysis but limited Some insight and exploration of ideas

Sound conclusions

No significant inaccuracies or omissions

Some analysis, evaluation or synthesis of information

Lacking clarity at times

Some evidence of

preparation

Referencing is sound. Mostly appropriate sources.

Numerous errors or

inconsistencies

Adequate – Satisfactory

Some evidence of thinking independently to develop own ideas

Evaluation of relevant

theories or literature

Reasonable ability to

communicate clearly and effectively

Report information in a

structured way

Use of an appropriate format Quite comprehensive

knowledge

Satisfactory evidence of preparation

Satisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.

Numerous but minor errors in references

Adequate- Satisfactory

Evidence of thinking

independently to develop own ideas

Evaluation of relevant

theories or literature

Ability to communicate clearly and effectively

Report information in a

structured way

Use of an appropriate format Reasonably Accurate, quite comprehensive knowledge Satisfactory evidence of preparation

Coherent and well presented – minor errors

Satisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.

Minor errors in references

40-49 (D)

All learning outcomes met Competent (practical)

May be incomplete in

knowledge (some errors or omissions)

Insufficient analysis,

evaluation or synthesis

All learning outcomes met Competent (practical)

May be incomplete in

knowledge (some errors or omissions)

Weak or no analysis,

evaluation or synthesis

All learning outcomes met Competent (practical)

May be incomplete in

knowledge (some errors or omissions)

Weak or no analysis,

evaluation or synthesis

Limited application of

theories/knowledge

An awareness of appropriate principles/theories/technique s

Irrelevance to the task at times

Disorganised work with weak standard of presentation Numerous aberrations from the requirements of the task Referencing is attempted although may be

inconsistent, many errors, weak sources

Some application of

theories/knowledge

An awareness of appropriate principles/theories/technique s

Irrelevance to the task at times

Disorganised work with weak standard of presentation Aberrations from the

requirements of the task

Referencing is attempted although may be

inconsistent, many errors, weak sources

Some application of

theories/knowledge

An awareness of appropriate principles/theories/technique s

Irrelevance to the task at times

Disorganised work with weak standard of presentation Aberrations from the

requirements of the task

Referencing is attempted although may be

inconsistent, many errors, weak sources

Condoned Pass 30-

39

(R2/F1)

Learning outcomes not met Little relevant knowledge Lacking structure

Numerous errors in structure and form

Limited understanding of concepts/theories

No appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesis

Significant

inaccuracies/omissions

Not competent

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors

Learning outcomes not met Little relevant knowledge Lacking structure

Numerous errors in structure and form

Limited understanding of concepts/theories

No appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesis

Significant

inaccuracies/omissions

Not competent

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors

Learning outcomes not met Little relevant knowledge Lacking structure

Numerous errors in structure and form

Limited understanding of concepts/theories

No appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesis

Significant

inaccuracies/omissions

Not competent

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors

Under 30 (R2/F2)

Little engagement with the task

No basic understanding of the subject matter

Poor communication (written or verbal)

Lacking or no structure

Significant errors in structure and form

Many significant

inaccuracies/omissions – very little correct

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors

Little engagement with the task

No basic understanding of the subject matter

Poor communication (written or verbal)

Lacking or no structure

Significant errors in structure and form

Many significant

inaccuracies/omissions – very little correct

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors

Little engagement with the task

No basic understanding of the subject matter

Poor communication (written or verbal)

Lacking or no structure

Significant errors in structure and form

Many significant

inaccuracies/omissions – very little correct

Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors

(0%)

No submission

Nothing of relevance in the work submitted

No submission

Nothing of relevance in the work submitted

No submission

Nothing of relevance in the work submitted