Developing Leadership
and Management
Submission date: 10-May-2021 11:48PM (UTC+0100)
Submission ID: 152603975
File name: Developing_Leadership_and_management.docx (543.21K)
Word count: 3337
Character count: 18922
University of Derby
Derby Business School
Developing Leadership and Management (6HR510)
Exploring Leadership and Management
Student ID:
Date Submitted:10/5/2021
Word Count: 3194
Sensitivity: Internal
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Developing Leadership and Management
GRADEMARK REPORT
FINAL GRADE
12
GENERAL COMMENTS
Instructor
/0
Be advised that all assignment grades are subject
to internal and external moderation (audit) to
ensure consistency and fairness in the marking /
grading and feedback process. As such, until the
grades have been validated by the University of
Derby Examinations and Assessment Board, they
may be subject to change.
Please note that you are entitled to ask your
marking tutor for a face to face (in person or
virtual dependent on circumstances) meeting
(should you wish to) in order to discuss your work
and ways in which you might make improvements
to any subsequent module or programme
assignments.
Marking Tutor: Mike Gilbert
General Feedback Comments:
Please Note: An 81% similarity is a major concern.
It shows that there is very little original work here
and suggests the ideas are simply copied from
other sources. This could constitute an academic
offence.
Unfortunately you do not appear to have engaged
in answering this assignment. The similarity index
shows a lack of originality and the evident lack of
appropriate academic research completely
undermines any credibility of your work.
You need to discuss this with me as you construct
your resubmission.
To further develop your academic skills, you may
wish to consider the following points;
1. Please do some academic research. You will
achieve nothing preparing work that has so little
academic models and theories to facilitate your
discussion.
2. Focus on answering the question. You were
provided with opportunities to come and talk to
me about the work, but I'm not sure you took them.
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
Comment 1
What is this and why is it here?
PAGE 3
Comment 2
How do you know these things? Where is the academic research to back up these points?
Comment 3
The lack of appropriate academic underpinning is a concern. There is nothing here to
validate your ideas.
PAGE 4
Comment 4
Where is the academic research? This work appears subjective at best, copied from other
sources at worst.
Comment 5
This is not answering the question. Coaching is something that might be applied to any
number of leadership theories.
PAGE 5
Comment 6
Copying this from BING is not good practice, neither does it actually answer the question.
Comment 7
This is not good academic practice. You are simply undertaking a cut and paste from this
source.
PAGE 6
Comment 8
Where is the academic theory that would support what you are saying?
Comment 9
How do you know all this? Where is it coming from?
PAGE 7
Comment 10
No academic theories provided which can help validate your ideas.
Comment 11
This is not a strong rationale as you are not providing the necessary academic depth to
validate the inclusion of this issue as a leadership development need.
PAGE 8
Comment 12
Again, not a strong view as the lack of appropriate academic research is undermining the
quality of your argument.
PAGE 9
Comment 13
This does not make sense. It has no shape or structure to it.
PAGE 10
Comment 14
So what exactly are you measuring and how will you measure it? This thinking needs to be
structured far better.
PAGE 11
Comment 15
This is nowhere near the requirement for work at this level of study. This indicates a lack of
appropriate academic research and undermines the quality of your submission.
PAGE 12
PAGE 13
PAGE 14
RUBRIC: DLM L6
11 / 90
KNOWLEDGE (20%)
35 / 90
OUTSTANDING
(90)
• Detailed understanding of topic area backed up with relevant references •
Research beyond scope of module materials • Draws links to other modules • No
further development of answer required
EXCELLENT
(70)
• Wide topic knowledge from the module • Draws different concepts together
effectively • Strong use of relevant theoretical models and/or research • Fully
referenced with wide range of sources • Strong evidence of independent research
VERY GOOD
(60)
• Draws together some of the key topics from the module • Some use of theoretical
models and/or research to support answer • Evidence of some independent
research but largely guided by references provided in the module
GOOD
(50)
• Adequate use of module topics • Some gaps in knowledge or misunderstanding
of concepts • Some evidence of research and reading but may be overreliance on
core textbooks/overuse of direct quotes etc.
SATISFACTORY
(40)
• Limited use of topic knowledge from the module/lack of detail • Some significant
gaps in knowledge or misunderstanding • Limited or poor evidence of research
and reading • Overreliance on lecture slides and notes
UNSATISFACTORY
(35)
• No/ very limited use of topics from the module to answer the question • No/very
limited supporting literature • No/ very limited use of topics from the module to
answer the question • No/very limited supporting literature
VERY POOR
(5)
Well below the pass standard.
NOTHING OF MERIT
(1)
Nothing of value is contained in the submission
CRITICALITY (20%)
5 / 90
OUTSTANDING
(90)
• Extensive critical evaluation of arguments and cited literature • Fully balanced
argument
EXCELLENT
(70)
• Researched and answered from different angles. • Questions some of the
research sources used • Well balanced argument
VERY GOOD
(60)
• Explores some alternative arguments, advantages/disadvantages, pros and cons
etc. • Some evidence different approaches to answering the question are
understood
GOOD
(50)
• Acknowledges a few alternative arguments to the answer e.g. advantages and
disadvantages, pros and cons
SATISFACTORY
(40)
• Very limited identification of alternative arguments • Accepts reference sources
at face value
UNSATISFACTORY
• A one sided answer with no consideration of alternative arguments
(35)
VERY POOR
(5)
Well below the pass standard.
NOTHING OF MERIT
(1)
Nothing of value is contained in the submission
APPLICATION (20%)
5 / 90
OUTSTANDING
(90)
• Thoughtful and thorough application of knowledge, theory and research to
question throughout
EXCELLENT
(70)
• Tailors information to answer the question fully • Illustrates answer with range of
organisational examples • Links in relevant personal examples/experiences
VERY GOOD
(60)
• Uses some appropriate organisational examples discussed during the module •
Uses personal examples but may not always link this back to theory/literature •
Integration of theory/research may still be disjointed
GOOD
(50)
• Examples are limited or lack relevance • Examples are given but poorly integrated
into the answer
SATISFACTORY
(40)
• Lacks examples • Very limited reference to the task
UNSATISFACTORY
(35)
• No or inappropriate use of examples • No links to the task
VERY POOR
(5)
Well below the pass standard.
NOTHING OF MERIT
(1)
Nothing of value is contained in the submission
EVALUATION (20%)
5 / 90
OUTSTANDING
(90)
• All concepts and material fully relevant to the analysis and recommendations
including materials sourced from independent research
EXCELLENT
(70)
• All chosen ideas are relevant to the answer • Answers the question fully covering
all key concepts • No evidence of ‘padding’ with irrelevant information
VERY GOOD
(60)
• Uses some relevant ideas • Chooses appropriate concepts and makes an attempt
to answer the question • Information is mostly relevant to the question • Only
minor missing elements • Minimal ‘padding’ with irrelevant information
GOOD
(50)
• Some effort to answer the question • Some missing, weak or irrelevant elements •
Links to answer are unclear in places • May ‘pad’ with irrelevant information
SATISFACTORY
(40)
• Key elements of the question remain unanswered/underdeveloped • Confused
choice of concepts to answer the question • Important concepts may be difficult to
pick out
UNSATISFACTORY
(35)
• Largely irrelevant ideas • Does not answer the question that was asked • Covers
concepts which are not relevant to the answer.
VERY POOR
(5)
Well below the pass standard.
NOTHING OF MERIT
(1)
Nothing of value is contained in the submission
COMMUNICATION (20%)
5 / 90
OUTSTANDING
(90)
• Outstanding, sophisticated written communication • No significant areas for
further development
EXCELLENT
(70)
• Logical organisation and flow of ideas • Error free written communication •
Precise Harvard Referencing • An enjoyable read
VERY GOOD
(60)
• Largely well-structured answer • Only minor spelling/grammatical errors • Good
grasp of Harvard Referencing • Mainly easy to read and follow
GOOD
(50)
• Some spelling/grammatical errors but do not significantly interfere with
understanding • Some attempt to Harvard Reference • Difficult to read and follow
in places
SATISFACTORY
(40)
• Repeated spelling/grammatical issues • Weak Referencing skills • Difficult to read
and follow
UNSATISFACTORY
(35)
• Very difficult to read and follow • Extensive problems with written presentation •
No or incorrect Referencing
VERY POOR
(5)
Well below the pass standard.
NOTHING OF MERIT
(1)
Nothing of value is contained in the submission