Faculty of Business and Law

Bristol Business School

ACADEMIC YEAR 2020/2021

ASSESSMENT BRIEF AMENDED:

Module Code: UMSDMK-15-3

Module Title: Integrated Business Management Simulation
Submission Deadline: Tuesday 27 Apr 21
Assessment Component: Component B: Personal & Professional Development portfolio
Assessment Weighting: 25%
Marking and feedback tbc
deadline:

Assessment Instructions

Brief for Component B:

This is an individual submission. You are required to answer the following questions:

Part I (500 word limit in total)

Short reflective answers

1. How has the simulation helped you in understanding the challenges of working in a team. How
do you think this might translate to the workplace? (300 words).

2. What do you understand by the concept of personal resilience? Give an example to evidence
your own capacity for resilience using your work or personal experience. (200 words).

Part II (500 word limit)

Critically reflect on your strengths and weaknesses around your self-awareness and personal
resilience. Consider how these may impact your personal and professional development and your
personal challenges. (Here you might consider your learning across your programme of study).

Guidance
 Use Harvard Referencing when you cite and provide a full list of references at the end of your
portfolio. Given the length of this submission the list of references will not be extensive.
 The marking scheme at the end of this document describes the assessment marking criteria in
detail. This can guide you on the standard of work expected.

Formative Feedback and Support

Ensure you attend your weekly tutorials for help and support with your assignment. Some tutorials
will specifically focus on Component B of the assessment (see schedule). All students are timetabled
to be able to attend one tutorial each week.
 DO take the opportunity to seek tutor support during your usual scheduled class
 DO think about your piece and ask the questions you need to ask within your tutorials
 You can also arrange to discuss your assignment with your seminar tutor
Further information about this assessment is available on the Blackboard site for this module and
includes other guidance documents, reading list sections and other useful references.
Format

Please use the following file format: .doc or docx (please note that files submitted in formats
associated with Apple Mac computers are not able to be opened, and thus, not able to be marked).
It is your responsibility to ensure you submit your coursework in the appropriate format. We
cannot ensure that other formats are compatible with markers’ software.

Please ensure you provide your student number on the first page of your submission

Word Limit
 There is a word limit specified for each question.
 The marker WILL stop reading once the word count has been reached and nothing further will be
taken into account in the allocation of marks.

You can view the UWE word count policy here: http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/policies

Appendices are not expected, if you do decide to use appendices remember these will NOT be read
or marked.

Further Guidance and Support

Guidance on study skills: http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/studysupport/studyskills.aspx

Writing skills
https://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/studysupport/studyskills/readingandwriting/writing.aspx

Guidance on UWE assessment regulations and terminology:

http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/academicadvice/assessments/assessmentsguide.aspx

Guidance on using the library: http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/library/usingthelibrary.aspx

Personal Circumstances
If you are experiencing difficulties in completing a piece of assessment on time due to unexpected
circumstances (for example illness, accident, bereavement), you should seek advice from a Student
Support Adviser at the earliest opportunity.

Appointments with a student adviser can be made via an Information Point or online at:
http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/academicadvice/studentadvisers.aspx

Further details on PCs can be found here:

http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/academicadvice/assessments/personalcircumstances.aspx
Descriptor

Assessment criteria/ Theory, Knowledge and Understanding Analysis and Self-Reflection Self-Evaluation and Coherent Argument
weighting

(33%)
(33%) (33%)
Grading
level

70+ PASS Makes reference to relevant concepts and Perceptive analysis and deep self-reflections Excellent evidence of critical thinking and well
demonstrates a detailed and comprehensive which raises insightful issues and creates a supported self-evaluations.
Excellent knowledge and understanding of the theories deeper understanding of the self.
and concepts used. Clear and detailed linkages made between
Very good integration of theory and examples analysis and plans for personal development.
Shows excellent evidence of reading widely. from own experience, connections are made
between what a given theory says and how it Strong development of personal strengths and
connects to the given example. weaknesses that are clearly warranted
Extensive reference to wide range of relevant through self-analysis.
literature and media. Well chosen, interesting and highly relevant
examples from own practice given.

60-69 PASS Draws on relevant concepts and demonstrates Good evidence of self- analysis and self- Some evidence of critical thinking, sound
a good knowledge and understanding of reflection, that creates insight and deeper judgement, clear reasoning and support for
65-69%: theories and concepts – clearly stated and self-understanding. self-evaluations.
accurate – but some areas could be stronger.
Very good Good integration of theory and examples – Clear linkages made between analysis and
Shows good evidence of reading, going not focussing on either one too much plans for personal development.
beyond the more basic texts and sources.
Good number and quality of examples given Development of personal strengths and
60-64%:
Reference to a good range of relevant from own practice. weaknesses that are clearly warranted
literature and media. through self-analysis.
Good
50-59 PASS Broadly adequate knowledge of relevant Reasonable analysis in places, but sometimes Adequate evidence of judgment, with some
concepts. Description may be vague and may lapses into description of own experiences or attempt at self-evaluation but tendency
contain minor errors. of theory rather than analysis towards description

55-59% Competent Clumsy - may use technical language, but Linkages made between analysis and plans for
doesn’t show full understanding personal development
Some linkage between theory and own
Adequate evidence of reading. examples (some strong, some weak links) Development of personal strengths and
50-54% Adequate
weaknesses that are mainly warranted
Adequate number and quality examples. through self-analysis.
Some reference to relevant literature and
media.

40-49 PASS Knowledge and understanding of theories and Limited analysis of the self, tending toward Poor judgment, some unsupported assertions.
concepts not evident description. Largely descriptive.
(generalised/incomplete/has errors).
Little linkage between theory and own Weak linkages made between analysis and
Limited evidence of reading – core examples (focussing on one at the expense of plans for personal development.
text/lecture material only. the other).
Personal strengths and weaknesses only partly
warranted through self-analysis.
Few references to relevant literature and
media. Few examples or examples not relevant.

35-39 FAIL Very weak knowledge and understanding of Weak or no analysis, tending toward Poor judgment, unsupported assertions.
theories and concepts description.
(generalised/incomplete/has errors). Largely descriptive.
Little or no linkage between theory and own
Little or no evidence of reading . examples (focussing on one at the expense of Few linkages identified between self-analysis
the other) and plans for personal development.

Few references to relevant literature and Poor or few examples Personal strengths and weaknesses
media. unwarranted through self-analysis.

34 > FAIL Knowledge and understanding of theories and Little or no self- analysis which is heavily Unsupported assertions and value judgments
concepts is very weak or non-existent. descriptive.
Weak No or limited linkages identified between self-
Little or no evidence of reading. No linkage between theory and personal analysis and plans for personal development.
Very few or no references to relevant examples (Either: mostly example with very No identification of personal strengths and
literature and media. little reference to theory, OR, theory-based weaknesses.
with very little reference to own examples)

Very few, irrelevant or no examples.

Areas of Strength:

Areas for Improvement: