1. BRIEF:
Unlike your typical, solutions-driven business pitch competition, you are required to focus on deeply understanding the context of a social or environmental problem requiring innovative solutions and entrepreneurial interventions. You are expected to analyze and demonstrate understanding of the ethos of a narrow issue from among the global challenges discussed in the module, map the landscape, and present your findings. General essays / reports on Poverty, Health systems, Climate change etc., and issues that do not fall into the Global challanges discussed in the module are not allowed.
Students must submit a visual map or chart, an analysis of their research, and a bibliography:
Visual Map or Chart: Ideally you will find a way to present all or part of your findings in a visual system map. This includes charts, diagrams and infographics that visually represent your findings. You can do this as a free flowing visualisation of several smaller maps OR a one page poster. Just ensure that your visualisation is not too cluttered to read. Your map can be created using tools such as (but not limited to) PowerPoint, Prezi, Adobe, Piktochart, Canva, mindmap, website, Kumu, Plectica, Etc. However the only acceptable formats for submission are word and pdf. If your visual map includes interactive features and external content such as on a website, please provide a shareable link in your submission.
Analysis: Your visualisation should be accompanied by further analysis – at least 3000 words and not exceeding 4,000 words, excluding footnotes and references. You can create the report using (but not limited to) Word, Adobe Indesign, Canva etc. You can embed gif clips in your report. However the only acceptable submission formats are word, or a non-image pdf (image pdf not allowed). If you are using tools such as Canva, make sure the exported pdf file size is manageable for uploading onto moodle (Turnitin).
Bibliography: You must submit a thorough bibliography that cites the sources you have consulted in your research. The recommendation is to use the Harvard method for citation.
2. GUIDANCE:
Your assignment should address three important question areas, and be focused on a single issue. Each of these question areas should build upon the previous one.
Understanding the Challenge
What is the issue you are looking to understand? What is its history and what are the social, economic, corporate, environmental, cultural and political forces maintaining the status quo? Who is affected by it? What is the size and scope of the issue? What is the relationship of this problem to other areas of concern or opportunity?
Understanding Existing ‘Entrepreneurial’ Solution Efforts
Who is already trying to solve this problem? (entrepreneurs, innovators, accelerators and incubators, funders, government etc.) What are they doing? What efforts have been tried or are being tried? What has worked, what hasn’t? Are any of these efforts linked to one another? What networks & resources exist? What has happened in the past, and what could happen in the future?
Identifying Impact Gaps and Levers of Change
What is missing from the solutions landscape? Are there any market opportunities, missing links or actionable responses? What role do you see for future private, public, and social sector interventions or collaborations? What are the lessons you have learned from researching this issue?
3. TIPS FOR SELECTING A TOPIC
Start from what you are passionate about. Choosing a topic that gets you fired up is likely to make the process much more interesting and fun. Also ask yourself, “Where are my interests? Are there any topics I have been eager to learn more about? Is there an issue area I would like to dive into, and perhaps work in some day, which I could use this opportunity to explore?”
Narrow it down. Once you have chosen your topic, begin to narrow it down; this could be around a region or demographic, or a particular manifestation of the problem. The topic you focus on should be wide enough in scope that you can research and learn from a range of people working on the topic, but not so wide that it seems all-encompassing. For example, “water stress in South Africa” would be too wide, because “water stress” has too many root causes to explore in the timeline of this competition. One might start by mapping out some high level causes of water stress and then seeing which of those areas seem the most interesting or easiest to research given your time frame/research access. For example, if you decide to study agriculture, you might look at “irrigation challenges for small-holder farmers” in the country. In your report, you could still state that water stress alleviation is your key area of interest, and then explain why you decided to focus on this specific area of research as well as how it fits into the macro picture of water-stress issue.
Think about time allocation. The best assignments will be thorough and describe gaps and opportunities in the current solutions landscape. After you begin your research, ensure that you can do a thorough analysis in the time available. If you can’t, narrow your topic further!
Geographic specificity. While some problems are indeed global, how they show up in different cultures and geographies can be nuanced. As such, we suggest you focus on a specific geography, ideally one where you have access to data or expertise to help direct your learning. In other words, while access to affordable healthcare and medicines may be a challenge in many parts of the world, your research is likely to be more robust and useful if you choose a specific country or region of focus. You can still bring the data and learning from experiences in other countries into your research as comparison points, examples of alternate approaches to solutions, etc.
Think about any ethical considerations. If you decide to speak to and interview key beneficiaries, stakeholders and experts, you will want to consider any ethical implications this may have, and you will need to submit a research ethics application at:
http://researchethics.leedsbeckett.ac.uk
4. FORMAT Visual Map
You are required to present your findings visually as a map (plain or interactive. The idea is to make your research accessible and dynamic to a wider audience, and to help people comprehend the importance and complexity of your chosen challenge. The visual map shows how various components interact with each other to produce the challenge. You can do this as a free flowing visualisation of several smaller maps OR a one page poster. Just ensure that your visualisation is not too cluttered to read. Your map can be created using tools such as PowerPoint, Prezi, Adobe, Piktochart, Canva, mindmap, website, Kumu, Plectica, Etc. However the only acceptable formats for submission are word or pdf. If your visual map includes interactive features and external content such as on a website, please provide a shareable link in your submission. You do not need to map EVERY component – only the ones which are relevant in telling the story related to your chosen area of focus.
Written Summary of Your Research
Your visualisation should be accompanied by a written summary of at least 3,500 words and not exceeding 4,000 words, excluding footnotes. You can create the report using Word, Adobe InDesign, Canva etc. You can embed gif clips in your report. However the only acceptable submission formats are word or a non-image pdf (image pdf not allowed). If you are using tools such as Canva, make sure the exported pdf file size is manageable for uploading onto moodle (Turnitin). While your Visual Map can include text, and the written component can include visuals and tables, the purpose of the Written Summary is to provide a narrative supplement to your visual submission.
What to include in the Written Summary:
– A summary of the main findings of your research in relation to the Key Questions above: Understanding the challenge, Understanding Existing Solutions Efforts, Identifying Impact
Gaps and Levers for Change
– Reflections on the lessons you have learned throughout the process of your research – Brief explanation of why you selected your particular challenge and how you went about your research
– Any further detail and reflection you would like to add that has not been included in your visual map
Bibliography
You must submit a thorough bibliography that cites the sources you have consulted in your research. The best submissions will include a diverse range of sources and materials, from academic texts and articles to op-eds, business press and interviews. We recommend the Harvard method for citation, but you may use whichever citation method you are most familiar with.
5. Marking Criteria
There is no formulaic split between Visual map, Written summary and Bibliography. All three will be considered together to evaluate the following key criterion.
Thoroughness
To truly understand a challenge, you will have to go beyond simple web searches and a casual skim of websites. You will certainly explore the well-known organisations working to tackle your chosen issue, but the best assessments will also identify important but less famous resources and rising stars.
Also remember, information about programmes under development and challenges organisations have faced are not typically listed on company websites. We encourage you to contact organisations and speak to or write to people to find out more. You might want to seek out independent assessments of the organisations in addition to their own claims.
Clarity
The best submissions will be interesting to review, easy to follow and presented in a compelling way that invites action. You should imagine that the audience for your presentation is not just your academic tutors, but current practitioners, funders and those wanting to start in a new venture in the field. Ensure that you explain the challenge, define any specialist terms, and limit the use of unnecessary jargon or acronyms.
Insights
The best submissions will go beyond describing the problem and the existing solutions. To stand out, you will explain, for example, how several organisations would benefit from collaborating; how the sector in question could borrow a service model from another; what key research is missing to fuel change; or how effective government action could eliminate the need for a number of activities altogether. You might also identify a market opportunity and/or the possibility to scale an existing effort through partnerships, franchising, or replication through education. Your overall goal is to provide actionable insights for those currently or wanting to work in this sector.
First 60-69 50-59 40-49 Fail
Clarity (30%) CLEARLY defines the issue or problem; CLEARLY and
EXPLICITLY states purpose of submission; ACCURATELY
identifies the core issue; Report is ORGANIZED with
clear transitions throughout; Visual map is easy to follow and understand; report is easy to read
CLEARLY defines the issue; INDICATES purpose of submission, but is
NOT EXPLICIT; ACCURATELY
identifies the core issue; Report is
MOSTLY organized, but some spots are in need of better organization or transition; Visual map is easy to follow and understand; report is easy to read
Issue definition somewhat lacking in CLARITY; INDICATES purpose of
submission, but is not
EXPLICIT;
Identification of the core issue lacks in ACCURACY; Report somewhat lacks in organization, transitions or inparagraph organization ; Visual map is somewhat difficult to follow and understand; report is somewhat difficult to read
Defines the issue
POORLY; Not entirely ACCURATE about core issue; VAGUELY INDICATES purpose of submission, but is NOT explicit; report has BASIC organization, but lacks transitions or inparagraph organization; Visual map is difficult to follow and understand; report is difficult to read FAILS to CLEARLY define the issue or problem;
Does NOT
INDICATE, explicit or otherwise purpose of submission; There is NO organization to report, the report has few to no transitions, and/or there is little to no in paragraph organization; No visual map or it is very difficult to follow and understand; Report is difficult to read
Thoroughness (30%) IDENTIFIES and
ACCURATELY explains the relevant key concepts; IDENTIFIES and
ACCURATELY explains the relevant key concepts, but IDENTIFIES and explains MANY relevant key concepts, but many times uses concepts Identifies SOME (not all) key concepts;
Does NOT FULLY and
ACCURATELY Does NOT IDENTIFY key concepts or Identifies but FAILS to use key concepts
APPROPRIATELY uses relevant key concepts throughout the report;
CONSISTENTLY uses the relevant key concepts throughout the report; Uses
SUFFICIENT,
CREDIBLE, RELEVANT information from sources to support the argument;
–Information is impeccably ORGANIZED
to provide logical, clear basis for argument SOMETIMES uses concepts
INAPPROPRIATELY or uses concepts INCONSISTENTLY;
Uses CREDIBLE and RELEVANT
information, but needs some additional information to fully support the argument;
Information is mostly ORGANIZED to
provide logical, clear basis for argument INAPPROPRIATELY or uses concepts INCONSISTENTLY; Uses RELEVANT and mostly CREDIBLE information, but needs more information to fully support the argument;
Information is somewhat
ORGANIZED; logic of argument is somewhat difficult to follow explain each identified concept; Use of concepts is
SUPERFICIAL and/or
INACCURATE at times;
Gathers SOME CREDIBLE information, but not enough; SOME information may be IRRELEVANT;
Information is NOT ORGANIZED; logic of argument is difficult to follow or Uses key concepts
INAPPROPRIATELY throughout
the report; Relies on
INSUFFICIENT,
UNRELIABLE, or
IRRELEVANT
Information;
Information is not ORGANIZED;
logic of argument is very difficult to follow
Insights (40%) Uses EVIDENCE and REASON to come
to logical conclusions; Makes DEEP rather than superficial Uses EVIDENCE and REASON to obtain
justifiable, logical conclusions; Makes VALID inferences but some are Uses EVIDENCE and REASON to obtain conclusions that are mostly logical; Makes VALID inferences but some are Does follow SOME EVIDENCE to obtain conclusions that are mostly logical or valid; Inferences are more often than not
UNCLEAR or NOT based in evidence; Relies on
INSUFFICIENT,
UNRELIABLE, or
IRRELEVANT
Information;
Information is not ORGANIZED; logic of argument is difficult
inferences;
Inferences are
CONSISTENT with one another;
Identifies the most
SIGNIFICANT, INDEPTH, and INSIGHTFUL implications and consequences of the reasoning; Implications identified are DEEP rather than superficial SUPERFICIAL;
Inferences are
CONSISTENT with one another;
Identifies
SIGNIFICANT implications and consequences, but LACKS some DEPTH and INSIGHT; Implications identified are VALID, but some are SUPERFICIAL SUPERFICIAL; Inferences are somewhat CONSISTENT with one another; Identifies implications and consequences, but LACKS DEPTH and INSIGHT; Many
Implications are VALID, but equally many are
SUPERFICIAL Inferences are
ILLOGICAL, INCONSISTENT, and/or SUPERFICIAL; Identifies VALID implications and consequences; but misses SIGNIFICANT implications and/or implications grossly
LACK DEPTH and
INSIGHT;
Implications identified are SUPERFICIAL to follow; Uses SUPERFICIAL or IRRELEVANT evidence to come to
illogical or invalid conclusions; Exhibits CLOSED MINDEDNESS or HOSTILITY toward evidence/reason; maintains views based on self-interest
NOTES:
Important Note on Plagiarism
All assignments will be checked for plagiarism and unfair practice by using the latest software. Plagiarism is pretending that someone elses work or words are yours. This could include copying another students words or copying from an online resource. We expect you to use your own words in your assignments and acknowledge the ideas of others with correct referencing. Where you wish to emphasise the exact words used by another person we expect you to quote and reference their source. Those who knowingly plagiarise and undertake other forms of unfair practice are by their own admission untruthful and cheating. Students who obtain their award through hard work can be assured that the University will continue to prosecute any student who knowingly cheats.
Submission
Students must upload their assignments via the appropriate page of ‘Moodle’. Submission in any other way or format will not be accepted (except if unable to submit via ‘Moodle’ – see below).
Two separate file parts should be uploaded:
1. Part A – Visual Map
2. Part B – Written analysis and Bibliography
Turnitin accepts files in the following formats: Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, PostScript, PDF, HTML, RTF, plain text. Turnitin doesnt accept Microsoft PowerPoint or Publisher so if you need to submit work in these formats, e.g. a presentation or a poster, you must convert your files to PDF first.
Students who have technical problems uploading their assignment may email their assignment with an accompanying explanation to businessadmin@leedsbeckett.ac.uk. Students should note that emailed assignments will not be accepted without a valid explanation/ reason. Students will receive confirmation of valid email submission from the course team by return email. Late submissions by email must have a valid extension (see below).
Non-Submissions and Penalties
Assignments without valid extensions will be treated as Late (Penalties Apply in accordance with University regulations). Late Submissions / Extensions Students requiring an extension must complete an evidenced mitigating circumstances form prior to the submission deadline (form available from course admin teams). Valid extensions (mitigating circumstances) may only be granted by the appropriate administrative team or course leader (above form must be authorised before a valid extension is in place). Late submission penalties will be applied to all assessment without authorised mitigating circumstances.
Penalties:
Full-time Students
1 day late: 5 marks will be deducted from the mark achieved by the student.
2 to 9 days late: a further 5 marks will be deducted from the mark achieved by the student for every day on which the work remains unsubmitted.
(Should these penalties bring the final mark below 40%, then the work will normally be capped at 40%)
10 days late: a mark of zero will normally be recorded.
Part-time Students
1 to 2 days late: 5 marks will be deducted from the mark achieved by the student.
3 to 10 days late: a further 5 marks will be deducted from the mark achieved by the student for each two days on which the work remains unsubmitted (i.e. 5 marks for days 3-4; 5-6; 78; 9-10).
(Should these penalties bring the final mark below 40%, then the work will normally be capped at 40%)
11 days late: a mark of zero will normally be recorded.”
Where a late penalty is applied, within the timescales given above, it should not result in the failure of work or a further reduction in marks for failed work. In practical terms, this means that a raw mark of over 40 would be capped at 40 in applying any late penalties (within the timescales), and a raw mark of under 40 would not be reduced further with the application of late penalties. Examples of how penalties would be applied to a first sit mark for a fulltime student in these scenarios are given below:
Raw Mark Days Late Final Mark
Recorded
65 1 60
43 1 40
36 3 36
Where work for reassessment is submitted late, the work should be marked, the late penalty applied in accordance with the conventions above and then the mark capped for reassessment. For example:
Raw Mark Days Late Mark After
Application of
Late Penalty Final Mark
Recorded (‘R’ indicates capped resit)
65 1 60 40R
43 1 40 40R
36 3 36 36R
Mitigation and Extenuating Circumstances
Our university operates a fit to sit / fit to submit approach to extenuating circumstances which means students who take their assessment are declaring themselves fit to do so. Students who, for valid reasons, are not fit to take an assessment may submit their extenuating circumstances for consideration by their School Mitigation Panel. This will ensure that the Module Board is fully aware of your circumstances when finalising your marks for the modules affected.
You can apply online for extenuating circumstances by accessing the link below.
Once your submission has been completed, you will receive an automated notice confirming that “we have received your mitigation request”. https://myhub.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/mitigation
Contact
Please do not hesitate to contact the module tutor if you have any further questions about the assignment allowing adequate time for a response.
Dr. Suneel Kunamaneni: k.suneel@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
