A.  Create a document, as the new customer service manager, to help your team understand the four domains of emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management) by doing the following:

1.  Introduce yourself as the new customer service manager to your team, focusing on one of the six company values provided in the scenario.
2.  Discuss how you and your team will use one of the following elements of self-awareness in your daily interactions:

•   emotional awareness

•   accurate self-assessment

•   self-confidence

3.  Discuss how you and your team will use one of the following elements of self-management in your daily interactions:

•   emotional self-control

•   transparency

•   adaptability

•   achievement

•   initiative

•   optimism

4.  Discuss how you and your team will use social awareness to practice empathy in your daily interactions.

a.  Discuss how unconscious bias may affect ethical decision-making on your team.

b.  Describe two types of cognitive bias, including an example of each bias.

5.  Discuss how you and your team will use one of the following elements of relationship management in your daily interactions:

•   influence

•   coaching and mentoring

•   conflict management

•   teamwork

•   inspirational leadership a.  Discuss how you will create a culture of care within your team.

6.  Explain why you and your direct reports will use at least one of the four domains of emotional intelligence (self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management) to be effective as a team.

B.  Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

C.  Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

Criminal justice professionals in management positions are accountable to the public and to their teams, supervisors, and subordinates for the decisions they make in the line of duty. Individuals in every branch are expected to analyze the complexity of different situations and to determine ethical ways of responding to them. As a manager, you will need to be ready to speak to the ethical factors that inform decision-making strategies used in various criminal justice environments.

Imagine that you manage a team at an agency that has been invited to participate in a focus group for the ethics board. The focus group plans to compile a report on best practices in ethical decision-making to manage situations and dilemmas. For this assessment, you will prepare a response that you would present in the focus group.

Select one of the following criminal justice environments at the state or federal level as your focus for this assessment:

Interaction between law enforcement and the community Crisis scenario or disaster situation Pretrial assessment Pretrial detention Correctional facility (e.g., prison, jail, juvenile detention center) Clinic with diversion program for individuals with mental health issues Parole environment (e.g., halfway house) Research a case that calls into question the ethical conduct of a criminal justice professional within the selected criminal justice environment. Choose a real case published in the media and investigate the ethical considerations in the situation. Research best practices for handling similar issues.

Assessment Deliverable Create a 15- to 18-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation as if you were a criminal justice manager presenting to a focus group on best practices in ethical decision-making to manage various situations. Your presentation should include the following information supported by evidence from your research:

Summarize the case that you selected and explain the ethical considerations in the situation. Describe the environmental and cultural factors involved and relevant background information. Identify the originating causes influencing the dilemma. Determine ethical solutions for addressing these causes and preventing similar issues in the future. Summarize the protocol or process that the individual should have followed and identify any process changes since this incident.  Explain how you would respond to the situation and how you would apply ethical decision-making strategies in a similar situation.  Conclude with a statement about your level of confidence to make ethical decisions in a managerial role. Summarize your expectations for the ethical conduct of your team.

A.  Complete the VIA Character Strengths Survey using the “VIA Character Strengths Survey” web link and use the results of the survey to complete the following:

Note: Remember that this VIA Character Strengths Survey is not a test but rather a feedback tool. There is no wrong answer, so respond genuinely. If you download a copy of your survey results, you will receive a list of 24 items in order of your personal strengths, with the first five being your signature strengths and the last five being your lesser strengths. Refer to the attached “D253 VIA Character Strength Survey Instructions” supporting document for additional information on accessing the survey.

1.  Describe an experience in which you used one of your five signature strengths (i.e., the first five) from the survey results to overcome a challenge.

Note: Consider experiences from a school, volunteer, personal, or professional setting.

a.  Explain how you could apply the strength identified in part A1 as a values-based leader in your new position as the customer service manager from the scenario.

2.  Describe an experience in which being stronger in one of your five lesser strengths (i.e., the last five) from the survey results could have positively influenced the outcome.

Note: Consider experiences from a school, volunteer, personal, or professional setting.

a.  Explain how improving the lesser strength identified in part A2 will help accelerate your values-based leadership abilities in your new position as the customer service manager.

b.  List three actions you can take to grow in the area identified in part A2.

B.  To set the tone for your new team, explain to them who you are as a values-based leader by doing the following:

1.  List your top three values as a values-based leader from the “List of Values” web link.

Note: When listing your top three values, consider those values you hold most important.

a.  Explain how you will demonstrate each of the values listed in part B1 to serve both the team and the organization in the scenario.

C.  Based on your understanding of who you are as a leader after completing parts A and B, do the following:

1.  Discuss one leadership challenge relevant to ethics and values that you could face as the new customer service manager regarding selecting and announcing the new team lead.

Note: Consider your purpose as a new leader, ethical principles, relevant stakeholders, your expectations and point of view, and any assumptions you have made.

2.  Discuss how you, as the customer service manager, would use one of your top three values from part B1 and one of the company’s values in a conversation about the hiring decision with the person who was not selected as the team lead.

Note: Consider values, ethical responsibility, and personal and professional consequences.

D.  Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.

E.  Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

SMP429 Research Project Assessment Task Description 2026 | Sheffield

SMP429 Assessment Task Description

Course	MSc Reproductive and Developmental Medicine
Module	SMP429 Research Project
Component	Assessment: Assignment: Task
Academic Year	2025-2026

General Information

A scientific dissertation/thesis is generally considered to be an expanded paper. This is mainly because it follows a similar format of Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and References, but the size also permits additional reference sections including Table of Contents, List of Figures/Tables and Appendices.

Like any research paper, a dissertation reflects an overall study; however, the main differences being that
a)it primarily represents your own work and not that of co-authors*
b)was carried out over a relatively contracted length of time, and
c)recognises the fact that this is often the first real experience at research for you, and as such
d)allows ‘some’ scope for speculative reasoning in the discussion

Therefore, unlike peer-reviewed published papers, where all included work should be optimised and high quality, work presented in your thesis may include data that is not ‘publication quality’. It also allows flexibility to include extra information such as optimisation experiments, various extra controls, or even experiments that failed or were inconclusive.

Importantly, preparation of your thesis will encourage you to plan carefully what to include so you can present information in a logical format and communicate effectively what you have achieved.

The guidance provided in this document outlines the specific instructions required for thesis preparation. It is essential that you adhere to these instructions carefully to avoid unnecessary loss of marks.

Draft Versions and Feedback

You should meet with your supervisor early to discuss the different chapters of your thesis and expectations of reviewing draft versions. Note that each supervisor and the needs of the student will be different; however, all supervisors have been advised to provide feedback on one draft. Your supervisor will need to be given sufficient time to provide this feedback during the writing-up period (and consider some may take their summer holiday around this time). As a guide, we suggest you begin by providing a full ‘draft’ of your methods section in June, and an overall ‘draft’ of your dissertation towards the end of July.

General guidance

Formatting

You should produce your thesis using word processing software such as Microsoft Word, Google Docs etc. This allows for spell checking amongst other things:

• The font size should be a minimum of 11pt throughout and double (2.0) spaced (not 1.5 spaced).
• We recommend using a sans serif typeface such as Arial, Calibri or Helvetica.
• Pages should be numbered.

Structure

We recommend that your thesis contain the following sections in the following order; however, please speak with your supervisor if an alternative structure would be more appropriate or contact the module leads for advice:

Title page (see example) Acknowledgements Abstract
Table of Contents List of Tables
List of Figures Abbreviations Introduction (Chapter 1)
Materials and Methods (Chapter 2) Results (Chapter 3)
Discussion (Chapter 4) References
Appendices (if applicable)

Word Count

You should aim for approximately 10,000 words; however, you will not be penalised if you are up to 10% (1,000) words over this limit. If your thesis is more than 11,000 words you will be penalised by 10% (e.g. if your final grade is 71%, this will then be adjusted to 61%).
The word count includes all text from the beginning of the Introduction to the end of the Discussion (excluding text in Figure legends and Table footnotes). This also includes embedded citations (e.g.”in the ovary (Smith and Jones, 1999)” is counted as 7 words).

The word count does not include text from any other sections i.e. Title page, Abstract, Acknowledgements, List of Figures/Tables, Abbreviations, Reference list, Appendices, and as mentioned above, Figure and Table legends.

Remember to include your word count on the title page.

Additional: Note that the Abstract is limited to a maximum of 300 words (see below), and the Discussion should be a minimum of 1500 words (see below).

Nomenclature and Abbreviations

Abbreviations: should always be spelled out in full the first time, and then abbreviated subsequently e.g. “Protein y is induced by maturation promoting factor (MPF). By comparison, protein x is inhibited by MPF”. All abbreviations should also be included in your list of abbreviations.

Latin words: should be italicised, e.g. in vitro, in vivo, in silico, Mus musculus, Rattus norvegicus, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. For species naming, the first time mentioned should be spelled in full whereas subsequently can be abbreviated e.g. S. cerevisiae.

Genes and gene products: It is important that you adopt the correct formatting when referring to symbols for genes, mRNA and proteins. In addition, different conventions are applicable to different species. For example, human genes and mRNA should be capitalised and italicised e.g. GAPDH, whereas most other species, such as mouse, begin with a leading capital and all other letters are lower case and italicised e.g. Gapdh. For human and mouse proteins, symbols are not usually italicised; e.g. GAPDH. Note that these conventions will vary by species and for more details please consult the following

http://www.biosciencewriters.com/Guidelines-for-Formatting-Gene-and-Protein-Names.aspx

Preliminary pages

Title Page

The title page must contain the following information:

• Project title
• Full name
• Name of supervisor
• University statement
• Date
• Word count

An example title page is shown on the next page.

Acknowledgements

This section is optional but is a good opportunity to formally thank anyone who has helped you in any way with your project. This section is not marked.

Abstract

The abstract is limited to 300 words and should be a complete summary of your work. You can structure this under distinct sub-headings if you wish, or you can write it as a narrative. Either way, it should include a brief background and purpose of the study, the principle methods used and a summary of main findings with an overall conclusion.

Table of Contents

Lists all major sections and sub-sections aligned to a page number.

List of Figures

Provide a list if figure titles alongside respective page numbers e.g.
Figure 1.1    Molecular mechanisms of dorso-ventral patterning    15
Figure 1.2    Regulation of bone morphogenetic protein signalling    16

List of Tables

Provide a list of table titles alongside respective page numbers (as per List of Figures).

List of Abbreviations

Provide an alphabetical list of all abbreviations used in the thesis (note – you still need to write any acronyms or abbreviations in full the first time they are used in the text).

Introduction (Chapter 1)

The introduction is an important part as it sets the scene for the remainder of your thesis. In general, it should provide all the necessary background information required to justify the project. The bulk of this section will consist of the literature review.

The chapter should be organised into relevant sub-sections, which, along with the overall structure, should be discussed with your supervisor. It is often useful to consider starting with a very general overview, placing the problem in context. The introduction should progress with a logical sequence of sub-sections building to a clear rationale for your study.

A separate sub-section stating your over-arching hypothesis and your aims should be clearly presented at the end of the introduction. It is often also helpful to the reader to bullet point out the objectives – in other words, what specifically will you measure in order to achieve the aim.

Points to consider:

• Information should be supported with citations where relevant.
• Include diagrams to supplement your text (Label these as Fig 1.1, 1.2 etc),
• Avoid irrelevant information – remember overall word count,
• Consider summarising information in a table where relevant e.g. papers included in systematic review etc.

Tip: This chapter should stand alone as a coherent and convincing narrative that leaves the reader wanting to know more about the study. Even though you should state your aims and hypothesis towards the end, they should be implicit if the introduction is well written. Try giving your chapter to someone not involved with your project and ask them if they understand why the study is being carried out and how you intend to go about it.

Materials and Methods (Chapter 2)

This section should describe how the project was carried out in sufficient detail to allow the study to be repeated. Each technique or approach should be structured into distinct sub-sections, and these should be discussed with your supervisor to ensure all the relevant areas are covered. If comparing two tests that use different equipment you need to explain both sets of equipment. Or if the main approach to your work involves a key piece of equipment, or use of a specific programme, it may be worth including a sub-section describing the general capabilities and limitations of the overall approaches used.

Points to consider:

• Remember always to include details of controls and repeats/replicates,
• Details of chemicals and reagents should be provided. For the first time used they should be written in full
  e.g. (Qiagen, Crawley, West Sussex, UK), then afterwards can be abbreviated (Qiagen),
• Use diagrams (e.g. for illustrating a pipeline of techniques for processing samples, or for your experimental design) and tables if relevant,
• Include any ethics and governance approvals – if unsure, ask your supervisor.
• Methods should be written in past tense.
• Avoid using personal pronouns.

The methods section should be carefully considered and as with other sections, should be written succinctly. It should NEVER be written in the style of a recipe or straight from your lab book – e.g. “…next we added 2µl antibody, then mixed the sample before placing it in the centrifuge. I then programmed the centrifuge for 5,000g for 3min at RT. In the mean time I switched on the oven. Next we removed 20µl of the supernatant…” as this suggests that you simply followed a prescribed set of instructions with limited understanding.

Tip: It is important that the information you provide demonstrates that you clearly understand what was done. For instance, it is acceptable to include statements such as “was carried out in accordance with manufacturers’ guidelines” but you need to briefly elaborate on this to demonstrate you understand the steps involved. Sometimes this simply means prefacing a statement with a few words; for example, “A commercial ELISA kit was used to measure TNF levels in serum samples. Briefly, this involved…” or “Total RNA was extracted from HEK293T cells using …”

Results (Chapter 3)

In this section you should present your findings in a clear and logical manner. A text narrative should be used to facilitate this, supported by figures and tables. It is important to think about the most appropriate way to present your data – whether it be a graph, table, image, etc. If presenting quantitative data, have the appropriate statistics been applied? Do you understand what they mean?

Remember it is absolutely imperative that controls are presented. These should have been described carefully in the methods section, so the reader is expecting to see them.

Tip: Be careful about including interpretations and conclusions in the results section. It is acceptable to provide a brief interpretation of an experiment if it justifies the following one, but more general conclusions should be reserved for the discussion section. Similarly, avoid using subjective terms like “interestingly” or “rather surprisingly” – these are best kept for the discussion.

Figures

All figures and tables should be referred to in the text and these should be in numerical order i.e. do not mention Fig
3.4 before 3.3 etc. In addition, they should:

• be constructed carefully and consistently
• be clearly annotated, where necessary
• always be accompanied by a legend – see below
• be presented as close as possible to where there are referred in the text (not several pages away)

Figure legends

Figure legends should focus on describing the figure rather than restating results already described in the narrative. If the figure presents quantitative data in the form of a graph, state what the points/bars are; e.g. mean +/- SEM. It is also essential to state the subject (n) number used for analyses and the p-values for statistics. Annotated elements of images should be clearly explained e.g. scale bar represents 100µm, arrows indicate apoptotic cells etc.

Supplemental Data

Excessive raw data or experiments that detract from the flow of your results can be included as an appendix. If you are unsure, discuss with your supervisor. As a general rule, routine procedures or those not specific to your aims could be included as an appendix; for example, buffer recipes, preparing dilution standards for an assay, raw data, instructions for programming the equipment.

Discussion (Chapter 4)

This should be a minimum of 1500 words and should provide your interpretation of the results with support from the literature. There are no set rules for structuring a discussion section, but it is often useful to begin by briefly re-iterating the study aim and summarising the key findings. From this point, sub-headings can be useful to help organise information, which can be presented as a series of questions or statements.

A number of things to consider when writing your discussion:

• Have you managed to disprove your hypothesis?
• Are there similar studies and how do your findings compare with these?
• What are the wider implications of this study?
• Are you able to tie everything together (your results and what is already known) to propose a new theory?

The discussion section should also contain the following sub-sections:

• Limitations
  Describe any reasons or barriers that may explain why things may not have turned out as expected. How could these problems be overcome?
• Future Work
  Describe how you would take the project forward, if given the opportunity.
• Conclusion
  Provide a summary paragraph of your project and how this relates back to your initial aims and hypotheses.

Tip: The discussion section is a synthesis of your findings, although you may have carried out a number of independent experiments or analyses, avoid the temptation of sequentially discussing these parts in isolation. For example, if you analysed samples using PCR, then western blotting, then immunohistochemistry, consider discussing general gene/protein expression changes in relation to the experimental condition rather than discussing results of each technique in isolation. A diagram is an excellent way to synthesise your results and discussion with a truly unique perspective.

References

References and citations should be formatted according to the standard Harvard convention. General guidance based on the Harvard system of citing references is shown below:

For one author – “… was stated as fact (Johnson, 2019)”
For two authors – “… was believed to be true (May and Gove, 2018)”
For more than two authors “… was found to be false (Farage et al. 2014)”
For more than one reference, separate with a semi-colon “… was a blatant lie (Johnson, 2019; May and Gove, 2018; Farage et al. 2014)
For more than one reference by the same author in the same year, use a lowercase letter “… was preposterous (Trump et al. 2018a; Trump et al. 2018b)

As a narrative – “Starmer et al. (2025) has shown that…” or “… as claimed by Starmer et al. (2025)”. Additional guidance on referencing is available in the Course Handbook.
The final reference list should be compiled in alphabetical order.

Tip: It is recommended that a reference manager such as EndNote, Mendeley or RefWorks is used to format references and citations. For an appropriate output style we recommend using Journal of Cell Biology. Avoid simply trusting that the reference list will be correct and free from error. It is your responsibility to check there are no mistakes in the formatting or composition of your reference list.

EndNote is freely available to download from the IT Services website
https://students.sheffield.ac.uk/it-services/software

Appendices

Appendices are useful for providing further information to supplement your work. There is no limit on the amount of material included in this section, but please avoid adding unnecessary/irrelevant information.

Different appendices are normally listed in Roman lettering e.g. Appendix I: Primer design information
Appendix II: Buffer recipes

Submission

You will need to submit the SMPH Assessment Coversheet and complete the Assessment Fair Means declaration form available on Blackboard.

A thesis coversheet (available to download from Blackboard) should also be included with your document (i.e. before the title page). The cover sheet will need to be filled out and signed by you and your supervisor and indicates
(i) attribution of work, (ii) statement of probity and (iii) supervisor approval to submit thesis.
The final version of your thesis should be converted to a portable document file (pdf) to ensure the formatting is faithfully maintained. It is your responsibility to check and double-check that the content is correct. No changes to the document will be permissible after the deadline. The pdf file should then be submitted through Turnitin on Blackboard by the stated deadline.

Unfair Means and Late Submission

As with other written coursework your thesis will be analysed for text alignment by a web application (Turnitin). As all previous MSc theses have been submitted through Turnitin, the content of these will be held in Turnitin’s database. Evidence of any copying, plagiarism or collusion will result in disciplinary action.
**You will have the opportunity to submit your thesis through Turnitin and view the originality report on one occasion. It is very important to check that there are no blocks of text that could be construed as copied from an external source. If you are unsure, please ask your supervisor to go through it with you (or the Module Lead). You will only have one chance to do this, as the originality report will not be available for you to view when you do the final submission.

The date and time of the online submission of your pdf file is absolute unless there are personal circumstances that prevent you from meeting this deadline. If you are unable to meet this deadline you will need to fill out an Extension / Extenuating Circumstances form in accordance with the guidance on Blackboard and submit this along with the relevant documentary evidence.

Late submissions will be penalised by a 5% grade reduction per day, for up to 5 days as outlined in the Course Handbook. Any thesis submitted more than 5 days after the deadline will receive a mark of 0. Resubmission may then be possible at the discretion of the course team, but the final mark for the module will be capped at 50%.

Marking

Your dissertation will be marked by an independent examiner (ie a staff member who has no role in your project) in accordance with the schedule below. A second independent examiner will review and moderate the marking to agree a final mark. If markers are unable to agree, the External Examiner will assist with the moderation.

Further Guidance

• Your supervisor
• Module leads: Dr Mark Fenwick, Dr Gareth Richards, Dr Ian Wilkinson
• Other postgraduate students and staff
• Previous students’ theses – ask your supervisor or see the Module leads. Some previous examples will also be available on Blackboard.

Weight	Component	100-81	80-70	69-60	59-50	49-40	39-1
		Distinction	Distinction	Merit	Pass	Fail	Fail
10%	Abstract	Perfectly clear and concise  summary of the research rationale,  key findings and main conclusion,  succinct and to the point introduction to the topic. No room for improvement.	Very good abstract covering all the main elements of the study including all the relevant details and is written very clearly and accurately reflecting the study very well	Good accurate abstract with most of the key points of the study included. Some room for improvement  e.g. some small, but fundamental details missing or  background not clearly justified or final conclusion off topic.	Abstract provides an understandable summary of the overall  study but some key details missing or not well articulated	Abstract is partially incomplete, or  includes some irrelevant material.	Abstract is verbose and contains irrelevant detail, and does not adequately represent the study.  Much of it is simply repetition of text from the report
20%	Introduction	Perfectly clear and concise summary of the  research rationale, key findings and main conclusion, succinct and to the point  introduction to the topic. No room for improvement.	Clear well balanced introduction to the research topic. Pitched at the right level. Some good evidence of background reading. Aim clearly articulated and hypothesis well-justified.	Introduction presents a good background summary to the research. Makes a case for the aim and hypothesis  based on cited literature but is quite superficial in places or rationale for study is not entirely compelling	Introduction addresses some aspects of the study background but is quite limited and lacks depth. Some citations used. Aim is clear but rationale not strong.	Introduction demonstrates some knowledge  of the overall rationale for the study but with  very limited insight and some evidence of confusion	Introduction contains inaccuracies and does not support the main basis of the study.  Very difficult to follow logic/ rationale or mostly  off topic and unintelligible
20%	Methods	Publication quality.	Clearly written and succinct. No errors of fact and  only key/relevant information provided with all  replication and control detail included. One or  two minor details missing or slightly incorrect	Generally all the main details included. Only a few minor  ommissions of detail or slightly excessive detail. Has  understood the correct sequence of the techniques applied.	The main sub-sections are provided but these  contain some major ommisions of detail or  superfluous detail. Some information about controls and replicates provided.	The main sub-sections are provided but there is some confusion as to what was done.  Limited information on controls or replicates	Fundamental errors in terms of what was done. Limited understanding.
20%	Results	Publication standard presentation and  analysis  of data. No room for improvement.	Near publication-standard of data and figures. All figures are very well formatted and have self-explanatory figure legends and appropriate analysis. Some innovative analysis of data presented. Text narrative is well written logical and accurate.	The majority of figures are formatted, appropriately sized  and accompanied by comprehensive legends including statistical analysis Analyses quite basic but generally accurate.  Text narrative good but sometimes limited or slightly inaccurate	Some basic analysis of the data included but clearly more could be done. Text narrative provided but quite limited or verbose. Figures  presented but not well formatted or some  inaccuracies	Some figures/tables may lack legends. Limited accuracy. Formatting and analysis not consistent.  Figures may be badly drawn with inappropriate scales and lacking error bars/stats. Inconsistencies between data presented and text description. Limited analysis of data  (e.g. raw data presented)	Minimal presentation of results. Very poor  accuracy and analysis. Little attention to detail
20%	Discussion	Report provides evidence of novel ideas and insight with exceptional attention to detail and flair. Exceptional critical evaluation of results in context of published work. Limited, if any, room for improvement.	Very good discussion of work and how it fits with the relevant literature. Excellent use of references to support arguments. Results are very well linked within discussion and focussed clearly on original aims. Critical analysis/awareness of the limitations of the project. Evidence of originality. Good flow and structure	Good discussion of the data which is placed in the context of the published literature and shows analysis/depth of thought but some  areas could be expanded. Evidence of linking  data sets effectively. Clear, relevant conclusions. Awareness of limitations of the project.	Adequate discussion of data but little evidence of linking data sets or discussing in the context of the aims. The significance of the work in the  wider field is not always fully appreciated. Moderate citation of references to support arguments and may be based on relatively few references. May occasionally lack evidence of depth of thought.	Basic discussion of data with limited  attempt to relate results to published work. Few significant conclusions derived from the  results and these may be superficial. Limited use of references to support arguments.  Difficult to follow in places.	Inadequate discussion of findings.  Little attempt to discuss the significance of  the data. Poor effort at relating results to published work. Poor use of references. Difficult to follow.
10%	Presentation (ie formatting, referencing,  adherence to guidance)	Professional presentation. Excellent structure.  Accurate referencing throughout. Publication quality. No room for improvement.	Very good presentation. Well structured and nicely formatted.  Properly referenced throughout using  relevant literature. Very few if any grammatical/typo issues. Stuck to word limits in all areas.	Good presentation and good structure. A few errors but nothing major. Formatting could be improved in places. Consults a significant number of relevant  publications which are

Week 8 Final Paper

Your final paper will consist of a consolidation study. You are to make a case either for or against the benefits of consolidation. You can use the fire department from your Week 4 paper or choose another fire department. In many areas of the country, fire departments are undergoing consolidation. As communities grow and populations increase, some fire departments are considering combining with other departments in order to avoid duplication of services, reduce costs, and a variety of other reasons.You are to choose a fire department (“Department A”) and analyze the services offered to the citizens. Assume that a neighboring department (“Department B”) provides similar fire services, although possibly at a different level. Your goal with this paper is to determine whether or not there are benefits to consolidating two fire departments into a single department.Assume your are a Fire Chief of “Department A” that is considering absorbing “Department B.” You are writing this paper to make a case to your City Council or County Council as to whether or not it would be advantageous to consolidate and absorb “Department B.”Part 1. Report on the overall budget of both fire departments. Include the populations covered, the size of the departments, number of stations, services offered, ISO rating, etc. Give an overall view of both of the departments’ budget.Part 2. Make an argument as to whether or not consolidation of services into a single department would make sense from a financial standpoint. Analyze whether or not it would make sense to combine budgets in order to offer the same fire services, or possibly even better fire services, to the citizens to be covered under the consolidated fire department.Part 3. Explain how you would handle the change from two fire departments into a single department. If you are for consolidation, how would your command structure change? How would you absorb the personnel from the other fire department? Would you keep the same staffing at all of the stations? Would you keep all the stations open, or are there some that could be closed? How would you handle fire prevention and inspection efforts? If you are against consolidation, explain why. These are only some of the issues you should cover. Feel free to include others.Your paper should be a minimum of four pages and should be submitted in APA format. Use your textbook, the internet, professional journals as well as information you gain from personal interviews. You must use a minimum of four sources.

Rationale You have to demonstrate that you have learned and understood the development process, along with the key principles and layout designs of all areas and operations that comprise a new hospitality facility. Task Description Prepare a 20 minutes presentation which outlines the key design requirements to develop a new hospitality facility. Focus on the audience of the presentation, the potential investors. Task instructions You are required to develop a power point presentation which must be supported by a list of references at the end of the presentation. It should follow the project proposal format and content (assignment 2), and should explain in detail the concept and characteristics of the new hospitality facility. Submit your document are a PowerPoint. In your group, you need to decide which of your ideas, would be best to pitch to possible investors. Resources References used in the lectures. Referencing style Include a minimum of five academic sources and five websites of organisations and/or corporations. References need to follow SCU Harvard Style Referencing . Task submission To submit your project proposal, follow the link assessments 3 in the blackboard. Submit in the Turnitin link provided.

Written Assignment 1 – Instructions

Due: After you have completed Unit 6

Weight: Three written memos (10% of overall course grade)

Assignment 1 requires you to upload (as a single document) the memos you produced in the following learning activities:

Learning Activity 1.4: Selecting an Organization to Study (for context, not marking). Learning Activity 2.4: Legal Analysis Learning Activity 2.5: Hazard Assessment Learning Activity 3.4: Workflow Analysis Learning Activity 3.5: Job Analysis Learning Activity 3.6: Job Description and Job Specification Learning Activity 4.4: Labour Demand Forecast Learning Activity 4.5: Internal Labour Supply Forecast Learning Activity 4.6: Gap Analysis and HR Objectives Learning Activity 5.4: Recruitment Strategy Learning Activity 5.5: Job Posting and Advertisement Learning Activity 6.4: Candidate Screen Process Learning Activity 6.5: Candidate Selection Process Learning Activity 6.6: Interview Questions Once you have created and uploaded the document, three things will happen:

Your tutor will review your submission to ensure that all the required memos are present. If there are missing memos or any of your memos lack citation, your submission will be returned to you for revision. Your tutor will select three memos to grade against each of their marking rubrics. These marked memos will be returned to you. Once you have received your marked memos back, you will contact your tutor to set up a time for a 20-minute oral quiz. During this oral quiz, your tutor will ask you questions about the three memos that were selected for grading. The questions are similar to the “As your write your memo, consider these questions” and are designed to probe the thinking that went into the creation of the memos. You may consult the memos and any other notes you have during the quiz

Rationale You have to demonstrate that you have learned and understood the development process, along with the key principles and layout designs of all areas and operations that comprise a new hospitality facility. Task Description Prepare a 20 minutes presentation which outlines the key design requirements to develop a new hospitality facility. Focus on the audience of the presentation, the potential investors. Task instructions You are required to develop a power point presentation which must be supported by a list of references at the end of the presentation. It should follow the project proposal format and content (assignment 2), and should explain in detail the concept and characteristics of the new hospitality facility. Submit your document are a PowerPoint. In your group, you need to decide which of your ideas, would be best to pitch to possible investors. Resources References used in the lectures. Referencing style Include a minimum of five academic sources and five websites of organisations and/or corporations. References need to follow SCU Harvard Style Referencing . Task submission To submit your project proposal, follow the link assessments 3 in the blackboard. Submit in the Turnitin link provided.

CMP212 Object Oriented Programming Assessment 2 Brief 2026 | Elizabeth

CMP212 Assessment 2 Brief

Programme Title	FdSc Computing
Module Title	Object Oriented Programming
Module Code	CMP212
Assessment Type	Practical
Submission Deadline	26/06/2026 – 04:00PM
Weight	70%
Prepared By	Akira Agusta

Module Aims

This module further develops the programming abilities of students by introducing them to object oriented programming (OOP) concepts such as classes, objects, encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism.

Learning Outcomes Assessed

No	Learning Outcomes
LO2	Design an object oriented application.
LO3	Distinguish and apply appropriate object oriented programming methodologies to create an application.

Description/Guidance

Assessment	Practical
Weight	70% Marks
Submission Method	Turnitin – Zip file including code, and You Tube video link

Basic Guidelines

You have been employed as a junior developer and have been given your first assignment. You will be helping to develop a Java application for the Newcastle Philatelist Club (NPC) who require a system for their members to organise stamps that they either own or are interested in.

You have been tasked with the design and development of a prototype application that meets the requirements outlined below and displays data using in-memory objects (non-permanent data storage) or that utilises comma-separated values (CSV) files to store data (permanent storage).

You are required to build a prototype application that meets the requirements below and demonstrates your ability to use OOP techniques.

Programme Application Requirements

1.Application compiles and displays a GUI, with views for:
a.Main Menu (application homepage)
b.Manage Stamps (loads the different stamp categories. Available categories are: Definitive, Commemorative, Used and Mint.)
c.Stamp ownership (allow users to organize their stamps into available categories)
d.Stamps wishlist (allow users to manage a list of stamps they wish to own)
2.Application displays data relevant to the views
3.Application allows multiple users to log in and store personalised ownership lists and wishlists (but all users have access to the same list of Stamps and Stamp Categories)
4.Application users cannot add, edit, or delete any of the categories in 1b
5.Application allows users to:
a.Add a new data item on views 1c and 1d
b.Edit a data item on views 1c and 1d
c.Delete a data item on views 1c and 1d

Buy Answer of CMP212 Object Oriented Programming Assessment 2

Chat With Experts

Additional Notes

You should plan your classes before you begin working on your application. You will be shown how to use the Unified Modelling Language (UML) to create a class diagram that highlights relationships between classes. You should also employ OOP concepts where possible.

On completion of your application, you are asked to create a video screen-recording of yourself (no more than 20 minutes) using the application and talking through its functionality. Your video should demonstrate how you have fulfilled each of the

requirements, starting from 1 to 5. You should upload this to YouTube as an unlisted video and provide a link for submission.

Assessment Criteria

Weight (%) Criteria

Weight (%)	Criteria
25%	Functionality and Requirement Fulfilment
25%	User Experience and Interface Design
25%	Code Quality and Efficiency
25%	Data Management and External Handling

Learning and Teaching Strategies

Our philosophy of learning and teaching, our understanding of teaching for level 5 and NCG policies and strategies have all influenced our specific approach to learning and teaching for the level 5. Our teaching methods have been developed with explicit attention to debates pertaining to student learning styles. As such, our teaching methods provide a framework via which students develop the capacity to manage their own learning and evolve, over the course of their studies, into independent learners, acquiring the knowledge, understanding and skills that are essential to learning in Higher Education and to lifelong learning, post-graduation. Lectures, tutorials, and student-centred learning exercises will be employed. Practical sessions will support the learning of abstract concepts. Workshops and demonstrations will be organised in different topics to help the students master the necessary skills to develop their knowledge in these areas. Wherever possible, reference will be made to additional material and academic journals in the relevant field of computing. The VLE will be used to augment face to face teaching and learning with additional opportunities for learning and access to resources. There will be an introduction to the use of the library and a supportive tutorial framework to give individual support where required.

Learning Materials/Resources

Books

• Lassoff, M (2017) Java programming for beginners, Packt Publishing
• Martin, R (2018) Clean Architecture, Pearson Education
• Schildt, H (2017) Java: The Complete Reference (10th Ed.), McGraw-Hill
• Urma, R., Fusco, M. and Mycroft, A (2018) Modern Java in Action (2nd Ed.),

Manning Publications

Websites

• Java Tutorial (w3schools.com)
• Java Tutorial | Learn Java Programming – java point
• Java Tutorial – GeeksforGeeks
• Java Tutorial (tutorialspoint.com)
• Learn Java Programming (programiz.com)

Contextualised Grading Criteria – Practical (70% Weighting)

Criteria	Grade	Description
Exceptional	90% – 100%	· Requirements 1 – 5 fully functional and exceptional extensions are there. · Application uses dynamic data and has implemented permanent storage via CSV. · GUI is intuitive and exceptionally designed. · Code is clean and exceptionally organized. · Exceptional evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism).
Outstanding	80% – 89%	· Requirements 1 – 5 fully functional. · Application uses dynamic data and has implemented permanent storage via CSV. · GUI is intuitive and outstanding. · Code is clean and commented. · Outstanding evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism).
Excellent	70% – 79%	· Requirements 1 – 5 fully functional. · Application uses dynamic data and has implemented permanent storage via CSV. · GUI is intuitive and well designed. · Code is clean and well organized. · Clear evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism).
Good	60% – 69%	· Requirements 1, 2, 4 and 5 fully functional. · Application uses hard-coded, static data. · GUI is suitable for the requirements though with some issues. · Code is generally clean and well organized. · Generally, very good evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism) though with some minor areas requiring additional work.
Average	50% – 59%	· Requirements 1, 2 and 5 fully functional, with partial completion of requirement 3 and/or 4. · Application uses hard-coded, static data. · GUI is mostly well designed with some minor issues. · Code is generally well organized. · Sound evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism) though with some areas requiring additional work.
Satisfactory	40% – 49%	· Requirements 1 and any other 2 attempted with some partial completion. · Application uses hard-coded, static data. · GUI is adequately designed.

		· Code is complete but may not be well organized. · Some evidence of OOP application throughout the work (inheritance, encapsulation, abstraction and polymorphism) though with many areas requiring additional work.
Unsatisfactory	30% – 39%	Knowledge and understanding at a limited level. There may be errors in either factual knowledge or understanding. Expression of ideas is not always clear, with ideas/arguments/discussions weakly structured. Practical application may be only partially complete or have glaring omissions or errors. To achieve a grade of 30% or more, a genuine attempt at the assessment criteria must be demonstrated.
Unsatisfactory	0% – 29%	Knowledge and understanding at an extremely limited level. There may be significant errors and/or omissions both in factual knowledge and understanding. Practical application may be extremely limited or not present at all.

4BU016 Sustainable Business CW Report Assignment Brief Semester 1 and 2 2026 | UOW

Assignment Brief 4BU016 Sustainable Business 25/26

Topic	Detail
Academic year / semester	2025/2026 Semester 1 and 2
Module code and title	4BU016 The Sustainable Business
Module Leader	Katie Brookes katie.brookes@wlv.ac.uk
Assignment name	Coursework
Assignment type	Report
Assignment weighting and size	100% 3000 words (+/-10%)
Assessment unpacking video location	Modules > Assessment > Assessment Information
‘What’s my assignment?’ unpacking date	Week 1 repeated week 4.
Formative submission date	See Canvas front page
Formative submission method	Upload to Canvas- see Assignment Tab in Canvas for details
Formative feedback date	To be discussed in class
Summative (i.e., final) submission date	See Canvas front page and Assignment Tab
Summative submission method	Online in Canvas
Assignment requirements	This assessment requires you to choose ANY ONE of the following United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, you will then choose ANY ONE for-profit organisation and provide detailed information of your chosen organisations sustainability practice(s) in relation to the selected theme.
The assessment requires you to choose ANY ONE of the following themes from the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and write a 3000-word report. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals can be accessed here: https://sdgs.un.org/goals  Theme 1: Affordable and Clean Energy (Goal 7) Theme 2: Decent Work and Economic Growth (Goal 8) Theme 3: Sustainable Cities and Communities (Goal 11) Theme 4: Responsible Consumption and Production (Goal 12) Theme 5: Climate Action (Goal 13) Theme 6: Life Below Water (Goal 14) The 3000-word report should include the following: A. Executive summary (300 words) – This is not included in the word count.              For the executive summary, you will provide a brief snapshot of the entire report. This should include:               – A brief introduction of the chosen theme (100 words)               – A brief introduction of the chosen organisation, it’s sustainability vision and mission (150 words)               – Sustainability theories used (50 words) B. Introduction to Sustainability theme (600 words) For this section, you will provide an overview of the chosen sustainability theme. This should include: – Brief description of the theme (150 words) – Key issues associated with the theme and its impact across the globe (450 words) C. Organisation (1000 words) For this section, you will choose any one for-profit organisation and provide detailed information of your chosen organisations’ sustainability practice(s) in relation to the selected theme. This should include: – Sustainability actions/practices that the organisation adopts to resolve the issues you identified for the chosen theme (500 words) – How the noted sustainability practices(s) impact the social(people), environmental(planet) and economic(profit) performance (500 words) D. Exploration of theory (1000 words) – For this section, you will select at least two models (in relation to the business functions) that can support your chosen organisation and resolve issues you identified as part of the chosen theme. This should include: – A brief description of selected model E.g., sustainable marketing or sustainable HR or sustainable finance or sustainable supply chain management. (300 words) – Clear justification of how the research gathered can add further value in supporting the organisation to resolve issues in relation to chosen theme (700 words) E. Recommendation (400 words) Based on your findings from theory, provide recommendations on how your chosen organisation can improve or develop their sustainability practices.  Proposed report structure:  1. Front page Include student number, chosen theme and module tutor name.  2. Executive summary (300 words) – This is not included in the word count. 3. Name of chosen theme (600 words) 4. Name of chosen organisation (1000 words 5. Exploration of theory (1000 words) 6. Recommendation (400 words) 7. Reference List 8. Appendices  Further instructions: – Please start each section on a new page – Use font size 11, font – Arial or Calibri
Learning outcomes	LO1- Demonstrate an understanding of sustainability within a range of business environments. LO2- Demonstrate an understanding of the Triple Bottom Line. LO3- Develop a sustainability plan for an organisation.
Assessment criteria (see rubric below for performance criteria)	· Exploration of sustainability theme/concepts- 20%. · Assessment of sustainability practice and its impact- 30%. · Theoretical analysis of sustainability concepts- 30%. · Recommendations- 10%. · Academic writing, references, clear and cohesive report- 10%.
Characteristics of a good submission	Shows understanding of the chosen theme. Clear knowledge for the chosen organisation including its current sustainability practice(s). Analyse at least two theoretical concepts that support the organisation and theme. Provide a number of recommendations appropriate for the organisation. Use books and journal articles to support your work as well as a range of wider reading.
Additional instructions	Reference list and appendices are NOT included in the word count. Always keep a copy of your drafts and a file of working documents. There may be circumstances – for example, if there are questions relating to the academic integrity of your work – where you may be asked to submit the evidence of your work and meet with your tutor to answer questions about your submission.
Professional Body requirements	(If applicable)
University regulations	University’s Academic Regulations Academic Integrity Policy Level and Mark Descriptors
Support	Student Support and Wellbeing Study Guides Skills for Learning – Introduction to Academic Study Skills Academic English Language Skills You should also refer to your Course and Module Guides
Date by which feedback will be provided	Within the University of Wolverhampton current guidelines.
Feedback format	Written feedback on Canvas
Resit details	The Resit requirement for this assignment is to provide a rework of the original submission, with additions and amendments highlighted, to indicate where you have applied the feedback received. The resit will be due in the resit period and the actual date will be available on Canvas approximately 6 weeks after the submission for the first assessment submission.

Are You Looking Answer for GMGT 5173 Organisational Behaviour Assignment?

Request to Buy Answer

Report criteria	80-100%  Work of an excellent standard	70-79%  Work of a very good standard	60-69%  Work of a good standard.	50-59%  Work of a satisfactory standard.	40-49%  Work of a pass standard.	0-39%  FAIL
Exploration of sustainability theme/concepts (20%)	The work demonstrates excellent exploration of chosen sustainability theme, underpinning the value and key components of the theme. A balanced, excellently structured piece of work that is consistent and demonstrates an excellent understanding of concepts within the theme.	The work demonstrates very good exploration of chosen sustainability theme, underpinning the value and key components of the theme. A balanced, very well- structured piece of work that is consistent and demonstrates a very good understanding of concepts within the theme.	The work demonstrates good exploration of chosen sustainability theme, underpinning the value and key components of the theme. A well- structured piece of work that is mostly consistent and demonstrates an overall good understanding of concepts within the theme.	The work demonstrates satisfactory exploration of chosen sustainability theme, underpinning some values and key components of the theme. A satisfactorily structured piece of work that is consistent in parts and demonstrates satisfactory understanding of concepts within the theme. Possible diversions from chosen theme of discussion	The work demonstrates a fair exploration of chosen sustainability theme, only partially underpinning values and key components of the theme. The work diverges from chosen theme in parts and demonstrates inconsistencies in understanding of key concepts within the theme.	The work fails to explore the chosen sustainability theme, thus failing to meet the assessment criteria. Uses inaccurate or inappropriate content to explore the chosen sustainability theme and/or completely diverges from selected theme and its underpinning concepts
Assessment of sustainability practices and for selected organisation and its impact on 3Ps (30%)	Excellent assessment of sustainability practices of the selected organisation in line with the chosen theme. The correlation between the theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps is presented at an excellent standard.	Very good assessment of sustainability practices of the selected organisation in line with the chosen theme. The correlation between the theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps is presented at a very good standard. .	Good assessment of sustainability practices of the selected organisation in line with the chosen theme. The correlation between the theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps is presented mostly at a good standard.	Satisfactory assessment of sustainability practices of the selected organisation mostly in line with the chosen theme. Possible diversion from chosen theme. The correlation between the theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps is presented at a satisfactory standard with some inconsistencies.	Partial assessment of sustainability practices of the selected organisation in relation to chosen theme. Possible diversion from chosen theme or partial information presented. The correlation between the chosen theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps is presented at a fair standard but demonstrates frequent inconsistencies.	The work fails to clearly assess the sustainability practices of the selected organisation, or the assessment is mostly inaccurate. The work lacks coherence between chosen theme, sustainability practice(s) and its impact on 3Ps, thus failing to meet the assignment criteria.
Theoretical analysis of sustainability concepts (30%)	Strong evidence of wider reading (beyond sources shared on Canvas) of sustainability theory and literature from credible sources. Excellent appraisal of appropriate theory around chosen theme. Excellent analysis of how theory aligns with sustainability practices of selected organisation.	Very good evidence of wider reading (beyond sources shared on Canvas) of sustainability theory and literature from credible sources. Very good appraisal of appropriate theory around chosen theme. Very good analysis of how theory aligns with sustainability practices of selected organisation.	Good evidence of reading of sustainability theory and literature from credible sources. Appraisal of appropriate theory around chosen theme is mostly good. Analysis of how theory aligns with sustainability practices of selected organisation is mostly good.