Poor formatting, difficult to understand. Most important references missing and serious errors in referencing. Reasonable formatting and flow. Some reasonably strong references cited along with weak sources and some errors in APA referencing. Well organized. Good formatting and flow. Several reasonable quality references and correct APA referencing but with some errors. Very good organisation and formatting for smooth flow of content. Adequate quality references and sources for data used; correct APA referencing. Excellent organization. Written with clarity and finesse. Exhaustive references for theory and data. Flawless APA referencing

Arguments do not link different parts of the analysis and alignment of analysis with recommendation poor. Different parts of the analysis moderately linked and just enough alignment of recommendation and analysis evident. Different parts of the analysis reasonably well linked; analysis and recommendations align with analysis Different parts of the analysis very well linked; recommendations align very well with analysis. Excellent alignment of all parts of the report. Recommendations flow elegantly from analyses.

Although some recommendations are made, they do not follow from analyses made. Reasonable recommendations made but only partially justified. Plausible recommendations made; some questions left unaddressed. Very good, plausible recommendations for the future. Takes all relevant questions into account. Highly plausible and incisive recommendations for future taking major trends in the market and could be a real world consultant’s advice.

60 – 69 Commendation 70 – 100 Distinction Very good understanding of theory evident with three theoretical frameworks used. Good research both in theory/ relevant literature and for case specific information with trend data. Critical analysis of the market and China strategies of M&S. Excellent understanding of theory demonstrated with at least three theoretical frameworks used exceptionally well. Excellent research both in theory/ relevant literature and for case specific information with extensive trend data. Incisive analysis of the market and China strategies of M&S.

Trait 0 Fail 1 – 49 Fail 50 – 54 Pass 55 – 59 Pass Analysis 30 % Work not submitted OR Work giving Inadequate understanding of theory with theoretical models inappropriately/ incorrectly used. Weak research for theory and case information. Weak, haphazard or incorrect arguments made on aspects of China strategies of M&S. Some analysis done showing a fair understanding of theory with two or three theoretical frameworks used. Research in theory/ relevant literature and for case specific information is just adequate. Some research of the market data used. Reasonable analysis of China strategies of M&S. Some critical analysis done showing a good understanding of theory with three theoretical frameworks used. Research in theory/ relevant literature and for case specific information is evident but more trend data needed for supporting arguments. Moderately strong analysis of the market and China strategies of M&S.

Append only relevant information to support your discussion and analysis in the main body of the report. Appendices should be properly organised and the reader referred to the appropriate appendix at the appropriate point in the text. Cite sources of all researched data and theories/concepts/models on which your analysis is based so as not to be flagged as plagiarism. Use APA referencing style. NOTE: Referring to the Assessment Criteria at the end of this assessment brief may help you craft your submission well. You should format your report so that the analysis, recommendation, alignment and general aspects (of formatting, flow, references, etc.) as given in the Assessment Criteria are clear.

This is a research-based assignment. The assignment requires you to demonstrate that you understand and can use theoretical frameworks in your analysis. It is therefore expected that you apply appropriate concepts, i.e., models/ theoretical frameworks, discussed in the module. You do not have to describe models in detail, only apply them well. Also, rather than applying every part equally, you may apply the relevant parts of the main models/ theoretical frameworks you choose to use. You may also draw briefly from models other than the three main ones you use if that is necessary. Your analytical discussion must be supported by a significant number of information sources as well as theory. You are free to gather the information you need from different authoritative sources to make your argument. A good argument is backed by analysis that is well supported by data. You should be thorough and detailed in your analysis, and should fully explain and justify all the points. However, there is a balance to be sought between a mass of detail and a thorough, yet relatively concise reasoning. Thus, your writing must be clear and concise.

Further information about general assessment criteria, ARTA regulations, referencing and plagiarism can be found on the module’s site on the e-Learning Portal. Students are advised to read and follow this information.This assignment is an INDIVIDUAL piece of work. It represents 80% of assessment and of the module mark. Writing and submission instructions: • The word limit for the assignment is 3500 words. See below for what is excluded from the word count. • An electronic version of your assignment must be submitted via the Turnitin FINAL SUBMISSION link on the module’ site on Blackboard. • Print on A4 paper with spacing preferably set at one-and-a-half lines. • Write your analysis as a piece of business communication in report style, using headings and a numbering system, including any illustrations you think are useful. Using figures, charts and tables to reflect trend data can give strong support to arguments you make. Make sure all data sources used are properly explained and referenced.