Assessment Coursework (Written Report)
Assessment code: 010
Academic Year: 2022/2023
Module Title: Managing Human Resources
Module Code: MOD003486
Module Leader: Saud Taj
Word Limit: 3,000 words
This excludes bibliography and other items listed in rule 6.75 of the Academic Regulations:
Assessed Learning Outcomes 1 and 3
Please refer to the deadline on the VLE
WRITING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:
• This assignment must be completed individually.
• You must use the Harvard referencing system.
• Your work must indicate the number of words you have used. Written assignments must not exceed the specified maximum number of words. When a written assignment is marked, the excessive use of words beyond the word limit is reflected in the academic judgement of the piece of work which results in a lower mark being awarded for the piece of work (regulation 6.74).
• Assignment submissions are to be made anonymously. Do not write your name anywhere on your work.
• Write your student ID number at the top of every page.
• Where the assignment comprises more than one task, all tasks must be submitted in a single document.
• You must number all pages.
SUBMITTING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:
• In order to achieve full marks, you must submit your work before the deadline. Work that is submitted late – if your work is submitted on the same day as the deadline by midnight, your mark will receive a 10% penalty. If you submit your work up to two working days after the published submission deadline – it will be accepted and marked. However, the element of the module’s assessment to which the work contributes will be capped with a maximum mark of 40%.
• Work cannot be submitted if the period of 2 working days after the deadline has passed (unless there is an approved extension). Failure to submit within the relevant period will mean that you have failed the assessment.
• Requests for short-term extensions will only be considered in the case of illness or other cause considered valid by the Director of Studies Team. Please contact DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. A request must normally be received and agreed by the Director of Studies Team in writing at least 24 hours prior to the deadline. See rules
• Exceptional Circumstances: The deadline for submission of exceptional circumstances in relation to this assignment is no later than five working days after the submission date of this work. Please contact the Director of Studies Team -
DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. See rules 6.112 – 6.141:
A multinational company has hired you as an HR Consultant to write a report of 3,000 words on its global recruitment and selection process to identify weaknesses in the system and propose improvements. As part of your report, you are required to answer the following questions:
Your core textbook (Hook and Jenkins, 2019, Ch.6) is your initial point of reference
1. While explaining the strategic importance of a recruitment and selection process, critically analyse some of the considerations an organisation should make during staff recruitment. (30 Marks)
2. Discuss some of the recruitment methods, techniques and approaches the firm can use to recruit staff from global labour markets. In your response, you must also discuss innovative approaches to addressing skill shortages. (30 Marks)
3. Interviews are an integral part of the selection process. What are some of the variations of interview techniques your firm should use to select staff from the global market. Your answer must clearly evaluate each of the techniques while discussing their advantages and disadvantages. You must also comment on the skills required by the interviewer to conduct interviews effectively. (30 Marks)
4. Use correct academic writing technique, including effective structure, grammar, spelling, use of in-text citations, and a full reference list, all of which should use the Harvard referencing convention. (10 Marks)
Organisations (for Benchmarking)
When designing a HRM business proposal it is important that you benchmark your plan and proposed methods. You can use any organisation of your choice as an example of success and best practice. You must apply critical thinking in your analysis in relation to your selected organisation against the areas outlined above.
Before selecting the organisation, you are strongly advised to discuss this with your lecturer and ensure that there is sufficient online material available.
Your work must be fully supported with references (cited in the Harvard style).
Evidence should be used from appropriate sources, such as,
1. Hook., C., Jenkins, A., 2019. Introducing Human Resource Management. 8th ed. Pearson.
2. Banfield. P., Kay. R., and Royles. D., 2018. Introduction to Human Resource Development. 3rd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. For an extensive list and further suggested reading, please refer to the module Sources and Reading List found on the VLE.
To achieve success, the following is required:
• The majority of work should demonstrate your own original thinking, with data, quotes, paraphrased opinions, and other evidence used where appropriate to evidence and support your own, original debate.
• This should be delivered in a report format, consisting of:
o Cover Page o Executive Summary o Contents Page o Introduction
o Findings Section – the main body of the report, separated into any number of sub-sections as required.
o Conclusion o Recommendations o Reference List o Appendices
• Students demonstrating higher level academic skills of analysis and evaluation, and sophisticated use of evidence/sources, will score in the higher grade-ranges.
• Referencing conventions and the credibility of sources is a vital aspect of academic writing. Students demonstrating a higher level of academic rigour in these areas will score in the higher grade-ranges.
ARU’s Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
Assessment criteria inform the assessment process by providing academic staff with a link between academic standards as set at the level of the award (these are defined in Section 2 of the Academic Regulations) and academic standards at module level. Assessment criteria are written in a language that is both generic and general, reflecting the Generic Learning Outcomes of ARU awards which, in turn, reflect the principal national reference point for academic standards, the Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK DegreeAwarding Bodies (FHEQ) (QAA, 2014).
Assessment criteria are not to be confused with marking schemes.
Assessment criteria identify student achievement of generic learning outcomes in the broadest possible terms by correlating three key variables - level of learning, marking standards, and student achievement - in a taxonomy of statements about assessment.
• level is as identified in the FHEQ and ARU’s Academic Regulations, ranging from Level 3 (Access), through Levels 4-6 (Undergraduate) to Level 7 (Postgraduate). A separate table is provided for each of the five levels.
• marking standards are identified by means of a percentage scale covering the mark of
0% (zero) and ten-mark bands: 1%-9%, 10%-19%, 20%-29%, 30%-39%, 40%-49%, 50%-59%, 60%-69%, 70%-79%, 80%-89% and 90%-100%. Marking standards are expressed as rows in the following tables.
• student achievement consists of a hierarchy of descriptors which are used by markers to distinguish between grades of student achievement:
Band (%) Principal Descriptor
20-29 Little evidence
1-9 No evidence
A marking scheme is used at module level to inform the first marking and internal and external moderation of each item of assessment. Marking schemes identify the knowledge and skills which students must demonstrate to achieve the learning outcomes of the module and are used to calculate the total mark to be awarded for an individual item of assessment.
ARU’s generic assessment criteria are intended to advise the writing of marking schemes, ensuring that they are broadly comparable across the institution.
A module marking scheme customises the ARU’s generic assessment criteria to fit a specific item of assessment for a module, identifying the basis on which marks are awarded. A marking scheme may range from the fairly general to the highly specific. In relatively openended assessments (e.g.: where students are asked to select one of a range of essay questions) a Module Leader would not necessarily expect to provide a detailed marking scheme specifying a ‘model answer’ to each specific essay question, but rather to provide a general marking scheme which identifies the characteristics of a good essay and can be applied to any of the essay questions set. The same would apply to many aspects of practice, performance or studio work. In contrast, less open-ended assessment tasks such as translation would require both a ‘model translation’ of the passage and a detailed marking scheme adapted to the specifics of the passage translated.
To facilitate consistency first markers constantly refer to the marking scheme when marking student work. They pass the marking scheme on to the internal moderator/second marker and eventually to the external examiner with student scripts. This enables all parties to understand the basis on which marks are awarded and lends a fundamental transparency to the assessment process. It should always be clear to the internal moderator and external examiner how marks have been determined.
Level 5 reflects continuing development from Level 4. At this level students are not fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with some direction. Students are expected to locate an increasingly detailed theoretical knowledge of the discipline within a more general intellectual context, and to demonstrate this through forms of expression which go beyond the merely descriptive or imitative. Students are expected to demonstrate analytical competence in terms both of problem identification and resolution, and to develop their skill sets as required.
Mark Bands Outcome Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band for
ARU’s Generic Learning Outcomes (Academic Regulations,
Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills
100% Achieves module outcome(s) Exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with extraordinary originality and autonomy. With some additional effort, work may be considered for internal publication Exceptional management of learning resources, with a higher degree of autonomy/ exploration that clearly exceeds the brief. Exceptional structure/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Exceptional team/practical/professional skills. With some additional effort, work may be considered for internal publication
89% Outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with clear originality and autonomy Outstanding management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Outstanding team/practical/professional skills
79% Excellent knowledge base, exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with considerable originality and autonomy Excellent management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that may exceed the brief. Structured/accurate expression. Excellent academic/ intellectual skills and team/practical/professional skills
69% Good knowledge base; explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with some originality, detail and autonomy Good management of learning with consistent self-direction. Structured and mainly accurate expression. Good academic/intellectual skills and team/practical/ professional skills
59% Sound knowledge base that begins to explore and analyse the theory and ethical issues of the discipline
Sound use of learning resources. Acceptable structure/accuracy in expression. Sound level of academic/intellectual skills, going beyond description at times. Sound team/practical/professional skills. Inconsistent self-direction
49% A marginal pass in
module outcome(s) Adequate knowledge base with some omissions and/or lack of theory of discipline and its ethical dimension Adequate use of learning resources with little self-direction. Some input to teamwork. Some difficulties with academic/intellectual skills. Largely imitative and descriptive. Some difficulty with structure and accuracy in expression, but developing practical/professional skills
39% A marginal fail in
qualifying mark Limited knowledge base; limited understanding of discipline and its ethical
dimension Limited use of learning resources, working towards self-direction. General difficulty with structure and accuracy in expression. Limited academic/ intellectual skills. Still mainly imitative and descriptive. Team/practical/ professional skills that are not yet secure
29% Fails to achieve module
Qualifying mark not satisfied. Little evidence of an information base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline and its ethical
dimension Little evidence of use of learning resources. No self-direction, with little evidence of contribution to teamwork. Little evidence of academic/intellectual skills and significant difficulties with structure/expression. Very imitative and descriptive. Little evidence of practical/professional skills
19% Deficient information base. Deficient understanding of discipline and its ethical
dimension Deficient use of learning resources. No attempt at self-direction with inadequate contribution to teamwork. Deficient academic/intellectual skills and major difficulty with structure/expression. Wholly imitative and descriptive. Deficient practical/professional skills
9% No evidence of any information base. No understanding of discipline and its ethical
dimension No evidence of use of learning resources of understanding of self-direction with no evidence of contribution to teamwork. No evidence academic/ intellectual skills and incoherent structure/ expression. No evidence of practical/professional skills
0% Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (eg:
answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes