Hi, please do the best work.
Assessment Information
Subject Code: BUS 604
Subject Name: Business Research Methods
Assessment Title: Assessment 2 – Essay on research paradigm
Weighting: 35 %
Length: 3000 words
Due Date: Submission due Week 4 – Sunday at 11.59 pm
COURSE: Master of Business (Research)
Unit: Business Research Methods
Unit Code: BUS604
Type of Assessment:
Assessment 2 – Report on research paradigm
Unit Learning Outcomes addressed:
(a) Demonstrate a critical appreciation of the major steps involved in conducting research.
(b) Demonstrate an extended understanding of various business research designs and methods and be able to evaluate and explain their strengths and weaknesses in research designs for particular projects.
(c) Demonstrate a critical appreciation of ethical issues in research and an advanced understanding of appropriate procedures and protocols applicable to these issues.
(d) Critically review and evaluate research literature. (e) Design research for a particular project, explaining the
limitations, advantages, and technical and ethical implications of the techniques employed.
(f) Select, justify and design questions suitable for a survey instrument and be able to analyse survey data in relation to a particular research question.
(g) Prepare a formal research proposal investigating an innovative and/or unresolved research question.
Criteria for Assessment:
Knowledge and Understanding Content and exploration of theories and ideas Analysis, synthesis and critical engagement Technical skills and referencing
Assessment Task: Using particular research methodologies raises many philosophical questions for researchers about the nature of reality, how knowledge is constructed, the role of value in research and how
research should be conducted. Identify relevant research philosophies or paradigms and investigate their epistemology, ontology, axiology and their implications for methodology (research design, data collection, etc.) selection. Your essay must focus on contentious and problematic issues,
therefore they must contain a well-argued case with an appropriate
structure and obey academic conventions regarding referencing,
etc.
Although you may use any scholarly sources, the following are list of readings you can use to support your arguments.
Creswell, J.W and Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, SAGE, Thousand Oaks
Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2018). Business research methods. Oxford university press. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (2017). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. Routledge. Hammersley, M., & Gomm, R. (1997). Bias in social research. Sociological Research Online, 2(1), 1-13. Neuman, W (2017) Social research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches: The Meanings of methodology, Allyn and Bacon, Boston. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International journal of social research methodology, 8(5), 375-387. Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European Journal of Education, 48(2), 311-325.
Submission Date: Week 4 (online submission).
Total Mark & Weighting:
35 marks | 35%
Students are advised that any submissions past the due date without an approved extension or approved extenuating circumstances incur a 5% penalty per calendar
day, calculated from the total mark e.g. a task marked out of 35 will incur a 1.75 mark penalty
per calendar day.
Criteria HD (High
Distinction) 85%-100%
DN (Distinction) 75%-84%
CR (Credit) 74%-65%
P (Pass) 50%-64%
F (Fail) 0%-49%
Knowledge and
u n d e rs ta n d i n g
5 m a rk s
Command
of the
topic,
unusual
creativity,
perception
and insight,
all
suggesting
that work
should be
published
in an
academic
forum.
Demonstr ate
s command
of the topic
by showing
creativity,
perception
and insight —
a serious
c o n tri b u tio n
to th e
academic
debate.
Demonstr ates
a well –
informed
understanding
of the topic
by showing
creativity and
insight — a
serious
contribution to
the academic
debate.
Understandin
g of
contemporary
academic
debate, with
some
creative input
and insight,
with a
tendency
toward
description.
Limited/poor
understanding
demonstrated. Any
creative input is
somewhat off the
point.
Content and
exploration of
theories and ideas
10 marks
Outstandin
g selection
that makes
a
substantial
contributio
n to
Ou tsta nd in g
s el ecti o n
from a wide
relevant and
innovative
range of
Selection
from a wide
and relevant
range o f
perspectives
and sources
Relevant
selection from
a range o f
perspectives
and sources.
Sources are
Narrow selection,
minimal use of
sources, to support
the argument.
academic
debate.
perspectives
and sources.
that draws
upon
contemporar
y academic
debate.
mostly
integra ted
into the
overall
argument.
Analysis,
synthesis and critical engagement 15 marks
Outstandin
g use of
source
material.
Excellent
argument
that is of
the highest
academic
quality.
Critical
distance and
outstanding
analysis of
the
question, to
a high
Sources ve ry
well
integrated into
the overall
argument.
Clear well
structured
argument that
is well crafted
and cogent.
Critical
distance and
outstanding
analysis of the
question.
Sources
well-
integrated
into the
overall
argument.
Clear,
cogent and
well-
structured
argument.
Critical
distance and sound
analysis of the question.
Mostly clear,
cogent and
well-structured
argument.
Demonstr ates
criticality a n d
g e ne rally
g o od analysis.
Sources are not
properly integrated
into the argument.
Absence of clear
and cogent
argument.
Incomplete analysis
with a tendency to
accept the source
material at face
value.
degree of
excellence.
Technical skills
and referencing
5marks
Referenci
ng
impeccab
le using
appropria
te
conventio
ns.
No errors
in
grammar
or
spelling.
Referencing
clear and
accurate using
appropriate
conventions.
Virtually no
errors i n
grammar or
spelling.
Referencin
g clear and
accurate
using
appropriat
e
conventions. Good grammar and spelling.
Referencing
sufficiently
clear and
using an
appropriate
convention.
Adequate
grammar and
spelling.
References
limited/inappropriat
e. Many errors in
grammar and
spelling, making it
difficult or impossible
to read.
You cannot copy content of this page