Individual Essay (60% of total grade)
Choose ONE of the following questions:
Explore ethical considerations and use real-world examples to illustrate your argument.
Discuss this influencer marketing role using relevant theories and models, UK law and regulatory frameworks, and draw on real-life examples to illustrate your argument.
Your answer should engage with relevant theories and critically assess their strengths and limitations. Use practical examples to illustrate your arguments.
You will be assessed against the following criteria:
Assessment Guidance Notes
Deadlines and Return of Marks
Submit your work for all assessment before or on the day of the deadline, before 4pm. Do not aim to submit at 4pm.
Description | Deadline | Percentage of the mark for the module | Submission mode | Deadline for mark and feedback to students |
Assessment 2 | Thursday, 09 January 2025 | 60% | Submit via Canvas | Thursday, February 06, 2025 |
Submission Procedure
Assessments must be submitted electronically through Canvas before 4pm on the day of the deadline. As the submission process can take some time, leave plenty of time for this; aim to submit no later than 3.50. Submission works as follows:
Extensions and Other Adjustments
Students with legitimate reasons for being unable to submit assessed work by the published deadline (e.g. personal illness, serious illness of a close relative or bereavement) should submit a Personal Extenuating Circumstances (PEC) Form, together with supporting evidence, electronically via the Student Self-Service Portal, to request an extension, a deferral to the next normal round of assessment, or one of a range of other adjustments. PEC forms should be submitted in advance of the original deadline if possible, but can be accepted after the deadline if the extenuating circumstances do not permit it to be submitted beforehand. Decisions on extensions and other adjustments are made by Senior Tutor, and cannot be made by module leaders, seminar leaders or personal tutors. Students will usually be notified of the decision (or status of the PEC request) within 5 working days.
Note: The guidance notes under ‘Assessment’ (above) will also be taken into consideration.
Classmark → | Low Fail 0-45 | High Fail 45-49 | Pass 50-59 | Merit 60-69 | Distinction | |||
Criteria ↓ | 70-79 | 80-89 | 90-100 | |||||
Knowledge & Understanding | Range of primary and secondary material discussed | Evidence of having studied few or no relevant materials. | Evidence of having studied a very narrow range of material. Relies on a limited number of sources and stays entirely with materials covered in teaching. | Evidence of having studied a reasonable range of material. Stays largely within materials covered in teaching but uses some recommended materials. | Evidence of having studied a wide range of material. Goes some way beyond material covered in teaching, using a wide range of recommended materials. | Evidence of having studied an ambitious in range of material. Considerably exceeds material covered in teaching. Introduces material found through independent study. | Evidence of having studied an exceptional range of material. | Evidence of having studied an outstanding range of material. |
Demonstration of understanding | Shows little or no understanding of relevant concepts. | Showslimited understanding of basic concepts. | Shows reasonable understanding of some complex concepts. | Shows good understanding of a reasonable number of complex concepts. | Shows excellent understanding of a good range of complex concepts. | Either the range or the understanding of complex concepts is exceptional. | Shows exceptional understanding of a wide range of complex concepts. | |
Research, Argument & Critical Thinking | Critical analysis | No critical analysis. No awareness of the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Almost entirely descriptive with very little critical comment. Little awareness of the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Largely descriptive with little critical comment. Some awareness of the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Some good critical analysis. Good awareness of the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Independent critical analysis. Excellent recognition of the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Exceptional critical analysis. Insight is provided into trends in the strengths/ limitations of the material used. | Outstanding critical analysis. Publication-quality understanding of strengths/ limitations of the material used. |
Quality and use of evidence/data | The argument is based on very little or no appropriate evidence. Little to no judgement is exhibited in use of evidence. | The argument uses little evidence or inappropriate evidence. Limited judgement is exhibited in use of evidence. | Sufficient appropriate evidence is presented to achieve the aims and objectives of the assignment. Reasonable judgement is exhibited in use of evidence. | The argument is well-supported by a good body ofappropriate evidence. Good judgement is exhibited in use of evidence. | The argument is supported very well by a substantial body of well-chosen evidence. Skill and confidence are exhibited in use of evidence. | Evidence of exceptional breadth or depth is presented to support the argument. Sophisticated judgement is applied in using this evidence. | Evidence of exceptional breadth and depth is presented to support the argument. Outstanding judgement is applied in using this evidence. | |
Independence and originality of thought in connecting ideas | Little to no marshallingof ideas. No linkages are established. Argument is absent or very poor. | Limited marshalling of ideas. Few or no linkages are established, leading to a weak argument. | Reasonable marshalling of ideas; some linkages are established. Argument is reasonable. | Disparate ideas are pulled together effectively. The work establishes robust linkages. Argument is well-developed. | Independent and original synthesis of ideas. An excellent, persuasive argument. | Exceptional synthesis of ideas. Argument is worthy of publication with revisions. | Outstanding synthesis of ideas. Argument merits publication with few or no revisions. | |
Execution | Organisation of content | Little or no indication of a structured discussion. | Careless or confused structure. | Reasonable structure. | A well-organised discussion with a clear structure. | A clear and concise structure that contributes very well to the discussion. | Organisation is exceptionally reader-friendly. | Organisation is beyond improvement. |
Layout of document and accuracy of referencing | Very poor layout. Very poor referencing. | Insufficient care is taken in layout and in referencing. | Reasonable care is taken in layout and in referencing. | A high level of care is taken in layout and in referencing. | Excellent care is taken in layout and in referencing. | Layout and referencing are both flawless. | Layout demonstrates creativity. Referencing is flawless. | |
Clarity and fluency of expression | Entirely or largely unclear and lacking in fluency. | More than half of the expression is unclear; the work has few fluent elements. | At least half of the work is clearly expressed; the work has some fluent elements. | The majority of the work is clearly expressed in fluent language. | With no more than minor exceptions, the work is clearly expressed in fluent language. | The whole work is clearly expressed in fluent language. | The whole work is efficiently and expertly expressed in highly fluent language. |
Enjoy 24/7 customer support for any queries or concerns you have.
Phone: +1 213 3772458
Email: support@gradeessays.com