Southampton Solent University Coursework Assessment Brief
Assessment Details
Unit Title: Critical Discourse 2 Unit Code: VCA300 Unit Leader: Nick Hampton Level: 6 Assessment Title: Dissertation Assessment Number: AE1 Assessment Type: Dissertation Restrictions on Time/Word Count: 5,000 words Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit: Assignments should be presented appropriately in line with the restrictions stated above; if an assignment exceeds the time/word count this will be taken in account in the marks given using the assessment criteria shown.* Individual/Group: Individual Assessment Weighting: 100 % Issue Date: September 2019 Hand In Date: 13th December 2019 NO LATER THAN 4PM Planned Feedback Date: TBA (within 4 working weeks of submission) Mode of Submission: On-line via unit’s SOL page’s Assessment tab by 4pm Number of copies to be submitted: 1 digital copy
Anonymous Marking
This assessment: (a) Is exempt from anonymous marking.
Assessment Task The student will be assessed in the form of a 5,000 word dissertation that demonstrates understanding and analysis of contemporary developments, issues and practices within the field of computer games and the wider context. You can refer to other practices, like film or animation, if relevant.
Students are asked to demonstrate that they can undertake independent and critically engaged research, producing a piece of academic writing that is informed by scholarly activity. Students are required to engage with secondary sources that are respected in their field of study.
The dissertation should build upon the Literature Review produced during the Level 5 Critical Discourse 1 studies. Expand your discussion and analysis of the texts used and add further texts to develop your arguments. Do not submit the exact same wording as used within the Literature Review, as this will be deemed as academic misconduct.
1
Academic Services June 2017
The work should evidence progress in all areas over and above Level 5, and include elements such as: references; quotes; supporting images; bibliography; introduction; abstract; a contents page; and an Appendix (if appropriate). The unit is assessed in terms of your ability to academically write on the topic under investigation in a way that is clearly informed by the research undertaken and contains the following elements: ambition, understanding, critical evaluation, a persuasive argument and clarity of communication.
Presentation Guidelines – please read carefully as failure to adhere to them will impact on your grade.
Your essay must be 5,000 words (+ or – 10%). Quotes count as part of the word count, but the Contents page and the Bibliography are not included in the word count. It must be double-spaced throughout in Arial font size 12 and all pages numbered.
Citation and bibliography must follow the Harvard system. Students should refer to the unit’s SOL page for further details on the Harvard Referencing System.
Your essay must have a front cover sheet with your full given name, student number, assignment name and number (i.e. Dissertation, AE1) and the unit title and code (i.e. Critical Discourse 2, VCA300) and your tutor’s full name (i.e. Nick Hampton).
Assessment criteria
See Next Page
Research 30%
Excellent: Knowledge of subject(s) evidenced to be derived from a comprehensive range of highly relevant and high quality secondary sources.
Very Good: Knowledge of subject(s) evidenced to be derived from a wide range of relevant, quality secondary sources.
Good: Knowledge of subject(s) evidenced to be derived from a range of relevant secondary sources evidenced.
Satisfactory: Knowledge of subject(s) evidenced to be derived from some secondary sources evidenced.
Poor: Knowledge of subject(s) is not proven to be derived from secondary sources.
Analysis 30%
Excellent:Exceptional understanding of chosen subject(s) through rigorous analysis of a wide range of relevant theoretical arguments.
Very Good: Strong understanding of chosen subject(s) through the analysis of a wide range of relevant theoretical arguments.
Good:Sound understanding of chosen subject(s) through the analysis of a range of relevant theoretical arguments.
Satisfactory:Some understanding of chosen subject(s) through the analysis of some theoretical arguments.
Poor:Little to no understanding of chosen subject(s) through the analysis of theoretical arguments.
Clarity of information 30%
Excellent:Exceptional essay structure, clarity of information and communication of ideas applied to a fully completed piece of academic writing.
Very Good: Strong essay structure, clarity of information and communication of ideas applied to a fully completed piece of academic writing.
Good:Sound essay structure, clarity of information and communication of ideas applied to a completed piece of academic writing.
Satisfactory: Sound essay structure, clarity of information and communication of ideas applied, but not a fully complete piece of academic writing.
Poor: Very poor essay structure, clarity of information and communication of ideas applied to an incomplete piece academic writing.
Presentation 10%
Excellent: Exceptional and highly appropriate presentation and use of Harvard Referencing referencing/citation.
Very Good: Strong presentation and use of Harvard Referencing referencing/citation.
Good: Sound presentation and use of Harvard Referencing referencing/citation.
Satisfactory: Presentation and use of Harvard Referencing referencing/citation is below expectations.
Poor: Very poor presentation and use of Harvard Referencing referencing/citation
Academic Services June 2017
Learning Outcomes This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the unit descriptors.
Late Submissions Students are reminded that: i. If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 5 working days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved; ii. If this assessment is submitted later than 5 working days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero; iii. If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work then it must be submitted by the deadline date;any Refer assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero. http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/ 2o-assessment-principles-and-regulations.pdf?t=1534423842941
Extenuating Circumstances The University’s Extenuating Circumstances procedure is in place if there are genuine circumstances that may prevent a student submitting an assessment. If students are not ‘fit to study’, they can either request an extension to the submission deadline of 5 working days or they can request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity (Defer). In both instances students must submit an EC application with relevant evidence. If accepted by the EC Panel there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested. Students are reminded that EC covers only short term issues (20 working days) and that if they experience longer term matters that impact on learning then they must contact the Student Hub for advice. A summary of guidance notes for students is given below: http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/ 2p-extenuating-circumstances.pdf?t=1534423896787
Academic Misconduct Any submission must be students’ own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The University’s Academic Handbook includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct. Students should check this link before submitting their work. Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:
4
Academic Services June 2017
http://portal.solent.ac.uk/support/official-documents/information-for-students/complain ts-conduct/student-academic-misconduct.aspx Ethics Policy The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project. The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook: http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/ 2s-university-ethics-policy.pdf Grade marking The University uses a letter grade scale for the marking of assessments. Unless students have been specifically informed otherwise their marked assignment will be awarded a letter grade. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook. http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/ 2o-annex-2-assessment-regulations-grade-marking-scale.pdf?t=1534424273208 Guidance for online submission through Solent Online Learning (SOL) http://learn.solent.ac.uk/onlinesubmission.
